Coupled with improved control and abatement techniques, targeted international and EU legislation has led to good progress being made in most EEA-33 countries towards reducing heavy metal emissions. Such legislation includes:
\u000aThere are also a number of specific EU environmental quality and emission standards for heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in coastal and inland waters, drinking waters, etc. These have only indirect relevance to air emissions as they do not directly specify emission or precipitation quality requirements, but rather specify the required quality of receiving waters. Such measures include the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Other measures include restrictions on the use of heavy metals in certain consumer products, such as the EC Regulation on the banning of exports of metallic mercury and certain mercury compounds and mixtures, and the safe storage of metallic mercury (No 1102/2008), as well as Directive 2007/51/EC amending Council Directive 7/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing of certain measuring devices containing mercury.
\u000aThe Minamata Convention on Mercury \u2014 a global, legally binding treaty \u2014 was agreed by governments in January 2013 and formally adopted as international law on 10 October 2013.
p35 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp36 (dp37 g19 Ven p38 sg20 Nsg11 VThe Aarhus Protocol on Heavy Metals to the UNECE LRTAP Convention obliges parties to reduce their emissions of Cd, Hg and Pb from 1990 levels (or an alternative year from 1985 to 1995 inclusive).
p39 sbtp40 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp41 (dp42 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/eea32-persistent-organic-pollutant-pop-emissions-1 p43 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp44 (dp45 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/eea32-persistent-organic-pollutant-pop-emissions-1/assessment-10 p46 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp47 (dp48 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAIR002 p49 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp50 (dp51 g19 Ven p52 sg20 Nsg11 VPersistent organic pollutant emissions p53 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp54 (dp55 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow do different sectors and processes contribute to emissions of persistent organic pollutants? | What progress is being made in reducing emissions of persistent organic pollutants across Europe? p56 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp57 (dp58 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-10 Persistent organic pollutant emissions \u000a Since 1990, emissions of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) decreased in the EEA-33 countries, e.g. hexachlorobenzene (HCB) decreased by 95 %, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by 75 %, dioxins and furans by around 70 % and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) by 83 %. \u000a The majority of countries report that POP emissions fell during the period 1990 to 2017. \u000a In 2017, the most significant sources of emissions included the \u2018Commercial, institutional and households\u2019 and \u2018Industrial processes and product use\u2019 sectors. \u000a hcb furans air pollution pops pah dioxins air pollution indicators air emissions pcb hch pollution organic pollutant AIR AIR002 002 p59 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp60 (dp61 g19 Ven p62 sg20 Nsg11 VTargeted European Commission legislation (directives and regulations), coupled with improved control and abatement techniques, have led to good progress being made by the EEA-33 countries towards reducing air emissions of POPs, including the PAH group of chemicals. Such legislation is described below.
\u000aIn May 2009, additional chemicals were added to the Stockholm Convention:
\u000aThe EC Communication on a Community Strategy for Dioxins, Furans and PCBs (COM (2001) 593 final) aims to assess the current state of the environment and to reduce human exposure and long-term environmental effects. This communication does not propose legislative measures, but could be the basis for a Community action plan.
\u000aThe Directive on the Limitation of Emissions of Certain Pollutants into the Air from Large Combustion Plants (2001/80/EC) has had the effect of reducing heavy metal and PAH emissions via dust control and absorption.
\u000aRegulation (EC) No 850/2004 on Persistent Organic Pollutants entered into force on 20 May 2004. The main purpose of this regulation is to enable the European Community to ratify the Stockholm Convention and the Aarhus Protocol. The regulation also deals with stockpiles of redundant substances.
\u000aEmissions of a number of heavy metals released from certain industrial facilities are also estimated and reported under the requirements of the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register Regulation (E-PRTR) (166/2006/EC).
\u000aThe EU Directive on Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe (2008/50/EC) and Directive 2004/107/EC relating to heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air contain provisions, and target and limit values for the further control of air pollutants in ambient air.
\u000aThere are also a number of specific EU environmental quality and emission standards for heavy metals and POPs in coastal and inland waters, drinking waters, etc. These have only indirect relevance to air emissions as they do not directly specify emission or precipitation quality requirements, but rather specify the required quality of receiving waters. Such measures include Directive 84/491/EEC on HCH discharges; Directives 76/464/EC and 86/280/EC on dangerous substances; and the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC).
p63 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp64 (dp65 g19 Ven p66 sg20 Nsg11 VAs noted above, the Aarhus Protocol on POPs to the UNECE LRTAP Convention obliges parties to reduce their emissions of dioxins, furans, PAHs and HCB to below their 1990 levels (or an alternative year between 1985 and 1995 inclusive).
p67 sbtp68 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp69 (dp70 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exceedance-of-air-quality-limit-2 p71 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp72 (dp73 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exceedance-of-air-quality-limit-2/assessment p74 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp75 (dp76 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAIR003 | CSI004 p77 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp78 (dp79 g19 Ven p80 sg20 Nsg11 VExceedance of air quality standards in Europe p81 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp82 (dp83 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp84 (dp85 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Exceedance of air quality standards in Europe EU legislation has led to improvements in air quality, with the percentage of urban citizens exposed to pollutant levels above standards set to protect human health falling between 2000 and 2018. However, poor air quality remains a problem: in 2018, 34 % of citizens were exposed to O 3 and 15 % to PM 10 above EU limit values. This is mainly due to emissions from transport and buildings, but also from agriculture and industry. Without radical changes to mobility, energy and food systems and industry, it is unlikely that air quality targets will be met in the near future. air air quality air pollution health quality of life CSI CSI004 AIR AIR003 004 003 p86 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp87 (dp88 g19 Ven p89 sg20 Nsg11 VNo related policy context has been specified.
p90 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp91 (dp92 g19 Ven p93 sg20 Nsg11 VNo related targets has been specified.
p94 sbtp95 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp96 (dp97 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exposure-of-ecosystems-to-acidification-15 p98 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp99 (dp100 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exposure-of-ecosystems-to-acidification-15/assessment p101 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp102 (dp103 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAIR004 | CSI005 p104 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp105 (dp106 g19 Ven p107 sg20 Nsg11 VExposure of Europe's ecosystems to ozone p108 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp109 (dp110 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp111 (dp112 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Exposure of Europe's ecosystems to ozone Ground-level ozone adversely affects not only human health but also vegetation and ecosystems across Europe, leading to decreased crop yields and forest growth, and loss of biodiversity. Much of Europe\u2019s lands are exposed to ozone levels above the threshold and long-term objective values set in the EU\u2019s Ambient Air Quality Directive (AAQD) for the protection of vegetation. For instance, after a 6-year period (2009-2014) of relatively low ozone values, the fraction of arable land exposed to levels above the AAQD threshold increased to 30 % in 2015, falling to 19 % in 2016, before increasing again to 26 % in 2017 and 45 % in 2018. \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a ozone aot40 csi air pollution CSI CSI005 AIR AIR004 005 004 p113 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp114 (dp115 g19 Ven p116 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator provides relevant information for the EU's Seventh Environmental Action Programme (7th EAP) and the Clean Air Programme for Europe proposed by the European Commission at the end of 2013. The long-term strategic objective and core of the new air package is to attain 'air quality levels that do not give rise to significant negative impacts on, or risks for, human health and the environment'. The 7th EAP kept the intermediate objectives already set in the 6th EAP and the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution to further reduce air pollution and its impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity by 2020. This will be accomplished by achieving full compliance with existing legislation. Furthermore, the long-term objective to not exceed critical levels remains in place.
\u000aInternationally, a first step to address air-pollution related impacts on health and the environment was the 1979 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Geneva Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP Convention).
\u000aA centrepiece of the convention is the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone, subsequently amended in 2012. Critical ozone levels for vegetation were also defined under the LRTAP Convention.
\u000aThe Air Quality Directive (EU, 2008) sets both a target value (to be met in 2010) and a long-term objective for ozone for the protection of vegetation. The long-term objective is largely consistent with the long-term critical level of ozone for crops (UNECE, 2015), as defined in the UNECE LRTAP Convention.
p117 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp118 (dp119 g19 Ven p120 sg20 Nsg11 V\u000aUsing a stepwise approach and taking into account advances in scientific knowledge, the long-term target under the amended protocol is that atmospheric depositions or concentrations do not exceed for parties within the geographical scope of EMEP, the critical levels of ozone, as given in Annex I.
\u000aAnnex I of the amended protocol includes a short definition of critical levels for ozone.
\u000aCritical levels for the protection of crops and forests (AOT40f) have also been defined under the LRTAP Convention (UNECE, 2015). The critical level for crops is consistent with the EU long-term objective for vegetation. The critical level for forests relates to the accumulated sum during the growing season (considered as April to September) and is set at 10 000 \u03bcg/m3·h.
\u000aFor the protection of vegetation from ozone exposure, the Air Quality Directive (EU, 2008) defines:
\u000aa) the target value for the protection of vegetation as AOT40-value (calculated from hourly values from May to July, considering the growing season) of 18 000 (\u03bcg/m3)·h, averaged over 5 years. This target value should be met in 2010 (2010 being the first year from which data will be used in the calculation over the following 5 years).
\u000ab) a long-term objective as AOT40-value (calculated from hourly values from May to July) of 6 000 (\u03bcg/m3)·h, with no defined date of attainment.
\u000aIn the assessment part of the indicator, the target value threshold is also considered. This is the target value considered only for 1 year and not for the averaged period of 5 years.
\u000aNew air policy objectives for 2030 are specified in the Clean Air Programme for Europe proposed by the European Commission in 2013, in line with the long term objective of reaching no exceedance of the critical levels.
\u000aDECISION No 1386/2013/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 20 November 2013 on a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020 \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. In November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7 th EU Environment Action Programme to 2020 \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. This programme is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020 based on the following vision: \u2018In 2050, we live well, within the planet\u2019s ecological limits. Our prosperity and healthy environment stem from an innovative, circular economy where nothing is wasted and where natural resources are managed sustainably, and biodiversity is protected, valued and restored in ways that enhance our society\u2019s resilience. Our low-carbon growth has long been decoupled from resource use, setting the pace for a safe and sustainable global society.\u2019
\u000a\u000aConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution 1999 Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone, amended on 4 May 2012.
\u000aCommunication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - "A Clean Air Programme for Europe", COM(2013) 918 final
\u000aDirective 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe.
\u000aCommunication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Thematic Strategy on air pollution (COM(2005) 0446 final)
\u000a\u000aUNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
p121 sbtp122 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp123 (dp124 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/main-anthropogenic-air-pollutant-emissions p125 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp126 (dp127 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/main-anthropogenic-air-pollutant-emissions/assessment-6 p128 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp129 (dp130 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAIR005 | CSI040 p131 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp132 (dp133 g19 Ven p134 sg20 Nsg11 VEmissions of the main air pollutants in Europe p135 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp136 (dp137 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow do different sectors and processes contribute to emissions of the main air pollutants? | What progress is being made in reducing emissions of the main air pollutants across Europe? p138 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp139 (dp140 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-6 Emissions of the main air pollutants in Europe \u000a In EEA countries, ammonia emissions have decreased by 18 % (23 % in the EU-28) overall since 1990, but have been continuously increasing since 2014. \u000a Since 1990, emissions of both nitrogen oxides and non-methane volatile organic compounds decreased by more than a half, with emission of nitrogen oxides decreasing by 57 % and non-methane volatile organic compounds by 54% in EEA countries (61 % and 58 % in the EU-28). \u000a Emissions of fine particulate matter decreased by almost one third (28 %) in both EEA countries and in the EU-28 from 2000. \u000a Since 1990, level of emissions of sulphur oxides strongly decreased by 82 % in EEA countries (91 % in the EU-28). \u000a europe trends emissions by sector group main air pollutant emissions CSI CSI040 AIR AIR005 040 005 p141 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp142 (dp143 g19 Ven p144 sg20 Nsg11 VCurrent EU air pollution policy is underpinned by the objectives and long-term goals of e.g. the Sixth Environment Action Programme (6EAP; EC, 2002) (covering the 2002\u20132012 period) to further reduce air pollution and its impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity by 2020, i.e. to attain 'levels of air quality that do not give rise to significant negative impacts on, and risks to, human health and the environment'. This goal has been reinforced in the Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP), which will run until 2020 (EU, 2013). To move towards achieving the TSAP objectives, EU air pollution legislation has followed a twin-track approach of implementing both emission mitigation controls and air\u2011quality standards. A new strategy, the Clean Air Programme for Europe, was proposed by the European Commission at the end of 2013 (EU, 2013).
\u000aInternationally, the 1979 UNECE LRTAP Convention (UNECE, 1979) was a first step towards addressing the impacts of air pollution on health and the environment. A centrepiece of the convention is the 1999 \u2018Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone\u2019, subsequently amended in 2012 (UNECE, 2012). The amended protocol sets emission ceilings (limits) for the year 2010 and national emission reduction commitments for the emission of the main air pollutants, namely SOx, NOx, NH3 and NMVOCs. It also includes reduction commitments for PM2.5 emissions for 2020. Under the protocol, the critical loads concept was established as a tool for informing political discussions related to damage to sensitive ecosystems (see CSI 005). Critical ozone levels (concentrations) for vegetation were also defined under the LRTAP Convention.
\u000aThe 1999 Gothenburg Protocol was followed in 2001 by the EU's NECD which has since been repealed by a revised NEC Directive in 2016 (EU, 2016). The original directive introduced legally binding national emission limits for four main air pollutants: SO2, NOx, NH3 and NMVOCs. The directive requires EU Member States to have met emission ceilings by 2010 and in the years thereafter, with emission reduction commitments established for 2020 and 2030 for the four main pollutants and PM2.5. The goal is to comply with the amended Gothenburg Protocol by 2020, followed by more ambitious reductions from 2030 onwards. The human health and environmental objectives defined in the NECD, the Gothenburg Protocol and the EU\u2019s Air Quality Directive (EU, 2008a) are addressed by indicators CSI004 and CSI005.
\u000aRegulation addressing ambient air concentrations
\u000aThe European directives currently regulating the ambient air concentrations of the main pollutants are designed to avoid, prevent or reduce the harmful effects of air pollutants on human health and the environment by implementing limit or target values for ambient concentrations of air pollutants. They are:
\u000aIn the case of non-compliance with the air quality limit and target values stipulated in European legislation, air quality management plans must be developed and implemented in the areas in which exceedances occur. These plans should aim to bring concentrations of air pollutants to levels below the limit and target values. To ensure overall coherence, and consistency between different policies, air quality plans should be consistent (if feasible) and integrated with plans and programmes in line with the directives regulating air pollutant emissions.
\u000aLegal instruments at European level that address emissions directly or indirectly
Source-specific EU legislation focuses on industrial emissions, road and off-road vehicle emissions, fuel quality standards, etc., by setting emission standards, requiring the use of best-available technology or setting requirements on fuel composition. In addition, several legal instruments are used to reduce environmental impacts from different activities or to promote environmentally friendly behaviour, and these also contribute indirectly to reducing air pollution, as summarised below.
\u000aEnd-of-pipe control in industrial installations:
\u000a\u000a
Emission standards for cars:
\u000a\u000a
Handling and storage:
\u000a\u000a
Fuel quality:
\u000a\u000a
International shipping:
\u000a\u000a
In addition to the policy instruments outlined above, there are several EU directives that also contribute indirectly to efforts to minimise air pollution. These directives are intended to reduce environmental impacts, including on climate change, and/or to promote environmentally friendly behaviour. Some examples are outlined below.
\u000aAgriculture:
\u000a
Energy taxation:
\u000a
Ecodesign:
\u000ap145 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp146 (dp147 g19 Ven p148 sg20 Nsg11 V
National Emission Ceilings Directive (2001/81/EC)
\u000aThe NECD (EU, 2001) sets pollutant-specific and legally binding emission ceilings for NOx, NMVOCs, SOx and NH3 for each EU Member State. The directive requires Member States to have met the ceilings and interim environmental objectives by 2010 and in the years thereafter (EEA, 2019). The directive sets specific environmental objectives that address the impacts of acidification and eutrophication on ecosystems, and the harmful effects of ozone on vegetation and human health (see CSI 005).
\u000aThe NECD was reviewed as part of the Clean Air Policy Package. In December 2016, the Council adopted the new directive and reporting under this directive already started in February 2017. The new directive repeals and replaces the current EU regime on the annual capping of national emissions of air pollutants, as defined in Directive 2001/81/EC. By doing so, it ensures that the national emission ceilings (NECs) set in the current NECD (2001/81/EC) for 2010 onwards for SOx, NOx, NMVOCs and NH3 shall apply until 2020, and it establishes new national emission 'reduction commitments', which are applicable from 2020 and from 2030, for SOx, NOx, NMVOCs, NH3 and PM2.5. The reduction commitments are binding for the period from 2020 to 2029 and from 2030 onwards. In principle, the commitments are indicative for 2025 by a linear emission reduction trajectory. A non-linear reduction trajectory is permissible if it is economically and technically more efficient, and provided that, from 2025, it progressively converges with the linear reduction trajectory.
\u000a\u000a
UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution Gothenburg Protocol (1999; amended in 2012)
\u000aThe amended Gothenburg Protocol sets national ceilings (limits) for the emission of the main air pollutants, namely SOx, NOx, NH3, NMVOCs and primary PM2.5 (UNECE, 2012). The EU as a whole has ratified the protocol, and reports EU emissions to the UNECE (EEA, 2016b).
\u000aThe target under the amended protocol (UNECE, 2012) is to ensure that \u2014 in the long term and using a stepwise approach that takes into account advances in scientific knowledge \u2014 atmospheric depositions or concentrations do not exceed critical loads for the nutrient nitrogen (see CSI 005). Critical levels for the protection of crops (AOT40c) and for the protection of forests (AOT40f) have also been defined under the LRTAP Convention, and the critical level for crops is consistent with the EU long-term objective for vegetation (see CSI 005).
\u000aThe 2010 targets under the NECD and Gothenburg Protocol are included in the EEA\u2019s NEC data viewer and the LRTAP data viewer.
p149 sbtp150 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp151 (dp152 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/global-and-european-temperature-10 p153 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp154 (dp155 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/global-and-european-temperature-10/assessment p156 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp157 (dp158 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM001 | CSI012 p159 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp160 (dp161 g19 Ven p162 sg20 Nsg11 VGlobal and European temperatures p163 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp164 (dp165 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp166 (dp167 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Global and European temperatures Global mean near-surface temperature during the last decade (2010-2019) was 0.94 to 1.03 °C warmer than the pre-industrial level, which makes it the warmest decade on record. European land temperatures have increased even faster over the same period, by 1.7 to 1.9 °C. All UNFCC member countries have committed in the Paris Agreement to limiting the global temperature increase to well below 2 °C above the pre-industrial level and to aim to limit the increase to 1.5 °C. Without drastic cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions, even the 2 °C limit will already be exceeded before 2050. scenarios climate change climate temperature surface temperature CSI CSI012 CLIM CLIM001 012 001 p168 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp169 (dp170 g19 Ven p171 sg20 Nsg11 VThe Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 defines the long-term goal to 'hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, since this would significantly reduce risks and the impacts of climate change\u2019 (UNFCCC, 2016). The need to limit the increase in GMT in accordance with the goals of the UNFCCC is also recognised in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 and in Goal 13 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable development (UNDRR, 2015; UN, 2015).
p172 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp173 (dp174 g19 Ven p175 sg20 Nsg11 V-
p176 sbtp177 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp178 (dp179 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/european-precipitation-2 p180 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp181 (dp182 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/european-precipitation-2/assessment p183 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp184 (dp185 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM002 p186 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp187 (dp188 g19 Ven p189 sg20 Nsg11 VMean precipitation p190 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp191 (dp192 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in precipitation across Europe? p193 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp194 (dp195 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Mean precipitation \u000a Annual precipitation since 1960 shows an increasing trend of up to 70 mm per decade in north-eastern and north-western Europe, and a decrease of up to 90 mm per decade in some parts of southern Europe. At mid-latitudes no significant changes in annual precipitation have been observed. Mean summer precipitation has significantly decreased by up to 20 mm per decade in most of southern Europe, while significant increases of up to 18 mm per decade have been recorded in parts of northern Europe. \u000a Projected changes in precipitation vary substantially across regions and seasons. Annual precipitation is generally projected to increase in northern Europe and to decrease in southern Europe. The projected decrease in southern Europe is strongest in the summer. \u000a scenarios climate change key climate variables precipitation temperature CLIM CLIM002 002 p196 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp197 (dp198 g19 Ven p199 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013 the European Commission presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package (http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/documentation_en.htm). This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change /* COM/2013/0216 final */ and a number of supporting documents. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which should occur through Bridging the knowledge gap and Further developing Climate-ADAPT as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Further objectives include Promoting action by Member States and Climate-proofing EU action: promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors. Many EU Member States have already taken action, such as by adopting national adaptation strategies, and several have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation.
\u000aThe European Commission and the European Environment Agency have developed the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT, http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/) to share knowledge on observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; on relevant research; on EU, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans; and on adaptation case studies.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p200 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp201 (dp202 g19 Ven p203 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p204 sbtp205 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp206 (dp207 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/precipitation-extremes-in-europe-3 p208 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp209 (dp210 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/precipitation-extremes-in-europe-3/assessment-1 p211 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp212 (dp213 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM004 p214 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp215 (dp216 g19 Ven p217 sg20 Nsg11 VHeavy precipitation in Europe p218 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp219 (dp220 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the past trends and projected changes in heavy precipitation events across Europe? p221 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp222 (dp223 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Heavy precipitation in Europe \u000a The intensity of heavy precipitation events in summer and winter have increased in northern and north-eastern Europe since the 1960s. Different indices show diverging trends for south-western and southern Europe. \u000a Heavy precipitation events are likely to become more frequent in most parts of Europe. The projected changes are strongest in Scandinavia and northern Europe in winter. \u000a climate change key climate variables heavy precipitation extreme prepicitation rainfall CLIM CLIM004 004 p224 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp225 (dp226 g19 Ven p227 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is 'Better informed decision-making'. This shall be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; (2) relevant research; (3) EU, transnational, national and sub-national adaptation strategies and plans; and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include 'Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies' and 'Promoting action by Member States'.
\u000aMost EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy. The evaluation package includes a Report from the Commission, a Commission Staff Working Document, the Adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches, and the reports from the JRC PESETA III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p228 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp229 (dp230 g19 Ven p231 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p232 sbtp233 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp234 (dp235 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/storms-2 p236 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp237 (dp238 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/storms-2/assessment p239 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp240 (dp241 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM005 p242 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp243 (dp244 g19 Ven p245 sg20 Nsg11 VWind storms p246 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp247 (dp248 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in extreme wind speeds across Europe? p249 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp250 (dp251 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Wind storms \u000a Storm location, frequency and intensity have shown considerable decadal variability across Europe over the past century, such that no significant long-term trends are apparent. \u000a Recent studies on changes in winter storm tracks generally project an extension eastwards of the North Atlantic storm track towards central Europe and the British Isles. \u000a Climate change simulations show diverging projections on changes in the number of winter storms across Europe. However, most studies agree that the risk of severe winter storms, and possibly of severe autumn storms, will increase for the North Atlantic and northern, north-western and central Europe over the 21st century. \u000a europe climate change projection wind speed CLIM CLIM005 005 p252 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp253 (dp254 g19 Ven p255 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013 the European Commission presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package (http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/documentation_en.htm). This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change /* COM/2013/0216 final */ and a number of supporting documents. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which should occur through Bridging the knowledge gap and Further developing Climate-ADAPT as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Further objectives include Promoting action by Member States and Climate-proofing EU action: promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors. Many EU Member States have already taken action, such as by adopting national adaptation strategies, and several have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation.
\u000aThe European Commission and the European Environment Agency have developed the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT, http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/) to share knowledge on observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; on relevant research; on EU, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans; and on adaptation case studies.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p256 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp257 (dp258 g19 Ven p259 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p260 sbtp261 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp262 (dp263 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/air-pollution-by-ozone-2 p264 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp265 (dp266 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/air-pollution-by-ozone-2/assessment p267 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp268 (dp269 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM006 p270 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp271 (dp272 g19 Ven p273 sg20 Nsg11 VAir pollution due to ozone: health impacts and effects of climate change p274 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp275 (dp276 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the effects of climate change on ozone concentrations across Europe and how can they affect health via population exposure? p277 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp278 (dp279 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Air pollution due to ozone: health impacts and effects of climate change \u000a \u000a There was no discernible trend in European ozone concentrations between 2003 and 2012, in terms of the annual mean of the daily maximum eight hour average measured at any type of station. \u000a It is difficult to attribute observed ozone exceedences, or changes therein, to individual causes such as climate change. \u000a Future climate change is expected to increase ozone concentrations, but this increase should not exceed 5 µg/m 3 by the middle of the century and would therefore likely be outweighed by reductions in ozone levels due to planned future emissions reductions. \u000a End of the century projections for the effects of climate change involve an increase of up to 8 µg/m 3 in ozone concentrations . \u000a air pollution ozone concentrations emissions strategies climate mitigation ozone climate change o3 CLIM CLIM006 006 p280 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp281 (dp282 g19 Ven p283 sg20 Nsg11 VHigh-levels of ozone cause breathing problems, trigger asthma, reduce lung function and cause lung disease (WHO, 2008). Epidemiological health evidence of chronic effects from exposure to ozone is now emerging, indicating considerably larger mortality effects than from acute exposure alone (WHO, 2013). The estimated effects of excessive exposure to ozone in 2010 for the EU-28 include about 26 500 premature deaths, 19 000 respiratory hospital admissions and 86 000 cardiovascular hospital admissions (people older than 64), and up to almost 109 million person-days with minor activity restrictions (all ages) (EU, 2013). The effect of ozone concentrations on total mortality, based on 2012 values, led to about 17 000 premature deaths in 40 European countries and about 16 000 in the EU-28 (EEA, 2015). There is scarce evidence that high ozone levels can further increase mortality during heat waves (ECDC, 2005; EPI, 2006).
\u000aIn the Communication \u201cA Clean Air Programme for Europe\u201d, the EU Clean Air Policy Package, adopted by the European Commission on 18 December 2013, proposes the short-term objective of achieving full compliance with existing legislation (Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC) by 2020 at the latest; and the long-term objective of no exceedences of the WHO guideline levels for human health.
\u000aSome of the priority objectives of the Seventh EU Environment Action Programme are to protect, conserve and enhance the EU's natural capital; safeguard its citizens from environment-related pressures and risks to health and well-being; and enhance the sustainability of its cities.
\u000aThe European Commission and the European Environment Agency have developed the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT) to share knowledge on observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and human health, relevant research, EU, national and sub-national adaptation strategies and plans, and adaptation case studies.
\u000aIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change and a number of supporting documents. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is \u201cBetter informed decision-making\u201d, which should occur through bridging the knowledge gap and further developing Climate-ADAPT as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Further objectives include \u201cPromoting action by Member States\u201d and \u201cClimate-proofing EU action: promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors\u201d. Many EU Member States have already taken action, such as by adopting national adaptation strategies, and several have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation.
p284 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp285 (dp286 g19 Ven p287 sg20 Nsg11 VThe following policy targets have been set:
Directive 2008/50/EC:
\u2022 A long-term objective for ozone levels of 120 microgram per cubic metre (µg/m3) as a maximum daily 8-hour mean within a calendar year (not to be exceeded any day). No attainment date specified.
\u2022 A target value for ozone, equal to the long-term objective, not to be exceeded more than 25 days per calendar year, averaged over three years. It had to be met in 2010 (average 2010 to 2012).
WHO Air Quality Guidelines:
\u2022 Daily maximum 8-hour mean of ozone concentrations: 100 µg/m3.
Clean Air Programme for Europe:
\u2022 Reduce ozone-acute-premature deaths in 2025 by between 28 and 39 % in relation 2005 figures.
In April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p311 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp312 (dp313 g19 Ven p314 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p315 sbtp316 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp317 (dp318 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/snow-cover-3 p319 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp320 (dp321 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/snow-cover-3/assessment p322 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp323 (dp324 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM008 p325 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp326 (dp327 g19 Ven p328 sg20 Nsg11 VSnow cover p329 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp330 (dp331 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in snow cover extent and snow mass in Europe? p332 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp333 (dp334 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Snow cover \u000a Snow cover extent in the Northern Hemisphere has declined significantly over the past 90 years, with most of the reductions occurring since 1980. Over the period 1967\u20132015, snow cover extent in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased by 7 % on average in March and April and by 47 % in June; the observed reductions in Europe are even larger, at 13 % for March and April and 76 % for June. \u000a Snow mass in the Northern Hemisphere is estimated to have decreased by 7 % in March from 1982 to 2009; snow mass in Europe has decreased more rapidly than the average for the Northern Hemisphere, but with large interannual variation. \u000a Model simulations project widespread reductions in the extent and duration of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere and in Europe over the 21st century. \u000a Changes in snow cover affect the Earth\u2019s surface reflectivity, water resources, flora and fauna and their ecology, agriculture, forestry, tourism, snow sports, transport and power generation. \u000a climate change cryosphere snow mass snow cover snow cover extent CLIM CLIM008 008 p335 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp336 (dp337 g19 Ven p338 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p339 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp340 (dp341 g19 Ven p342 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p343 sbtp344 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp345 (dp346 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenland-ice-sheet-4 p347 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp348 (dp349 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenland-ice-sheet-4/assessment p350 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp351 (dp352 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM009 p353 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp354 (dp355 g19 Ven p356 sg20 Nsg11 VGreenland and Antarctic ice sheets p357 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp358 (dp359 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets losing mass, and what is the effect on global sea level? p360 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp361 (dp362 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets \u000a The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are the largest bodies of ice in the world and play an important role in the global climate system. Both ice sheets have been losing mass at an increasing rate since the 1990s, which has contributed one third of the global sea level rise over this period. \u000a The cumulative ice loss from Greenland from 1992 to 2017 was 3 900 billion tonnes, which contributed approximately 11 mm of the global sea level rise; the corresponding figures for Antarctica are 2 600 billion tonnes, equivalent to a 7 mm contribution. \u000a All studies project further declines in the polar ice sheets in the future, but the degree of uncertainty is large. For a high-emissions scenario, it is estimated that the melting of the polar ice sheets will contribute up to 50 cm of global sea level rise during the 21st century and several metres in the very long term (several centuries to a millennium). \u000a sea level rise greenland ice sheet cryosphere climate change CLIM CLIM009 009 p363 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp364 (dp365 g19 Ven p366 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU adaptation strategy package. This package consists of the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU adaptation strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives of the EU adaptation strategy is to allow 'Better informed decision-making'. This will be achieved by bridging knowledge gaps and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include 'Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies' and 'Promoting action by Member States'.
\u000aIn November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU adaptation strategy. The evaluation package includes a report from the Commission, a Commission staff working document, adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches and reports from the JRC Peseta III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted the EU's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p367 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp368 (dp369 g19 Ven p370 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p371 sbtp372 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp373 (dp374 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/sea-level-rise-7 p375 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp376 (dp377 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/sea-level-rise-7/assessment p378 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp379 (dp380 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM012 | CSI047 p381 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp382 (dp383 g19 Ven p384 sg20 Nsg11 VGlobal and European sea level rise p385 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp386 (dp387 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp388 (dp389 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Global and European sea level rise Global mean sea level (GMSL) has risen about 19 cm since 1900, at an accelerating rate. GMSL reached its highest value ever in 2019. Climate models project a GMSL rise during the 21st century that will likely be in the range of 0.29-0.59 m for a low emissions scenario and 0.61-1.10 m for a high one. GMSL projections that include the possibility of faster disintegration of the polar ice sheets predict a rise of up to 2.4 m in 2100 and up to 15 m in 2300. Most coastal regions in Europe have experienced an increase in sea level relative to land, except for the northern Baltic coast. climate change coasts sea level CSI CSI047 CLIM CLIM012 047 012 p390 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp391 (dp392 g19 Ven p393 sg20 Nsg11 VSea level is an important indicator of climate change because it can have significant impacts on settlements, infrastructure, people and natural systems. The potential impacts include flooding, coastal erosion and the submergence of flat regions along continental coastlines and on islands. Rising sea levels can also cause saltwater intrusion into low-lying aquifers, thus threatening water supplies and endangering coastal ecosystems and wetlands.
\u000aChanges in global mean sea level result from a combination of several physical processes. Thermal expansion of the oceans occurs as a result of warming ocean water. Additional water is added to the ocean from a net melting of glaciers and small ice caps, and from the disintegration of the large Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
\u000aThe locally experienced changes in sea level differ from global average changes for various reasons, including changes in large-scale ocean circulation, changes in the gravity field, and vertical land movement due to the ongoing effects of post-glacial rebound, local groundwater extraction or other processes.
p394 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp395 (dp396 g19 Ven p397 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p398 sbtp399 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp400 (dp401 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/sea-surface-temperature-3 p402 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp403 (dp404 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/sea-surface-temperature-3/assessment p405 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp406 (dp407 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM013 | CSI046 p408 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp409 (dp410 g19 Ven p411 sg20 Nsg11 VSea surface temperature p412 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp413 (dp414 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the trends in surface water temperature across European seas? p415 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp416 (dp417 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Sea surface temperature \u000a All European seas have warmed considerably since 1870; the warming has been particularly rapid since the late 1970s. \u000a The trend in sea surface temperature rise during the satellite era (since 1981), for which more comprehensive data are available, has been between around 0.2 °C per decade, in the North Atlantic, and 0.5 °C per decade, in the Black Sea. \u000a Sea surface temperature is projected to continue to increase, depending on the emissions scenario, although more slowly than air temperature over land. \u000a In parallel with the rise in sea surface temperature, the frequency and magnitude of marine heatwaves has increased significantly globally and in European seas. This rise is projected to continue rapidly, with increasing impacts on ecosystems and land climate. \u000a water temperature CSI CSI046 CLIM CLIM013 046 013 p418 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp419 (dp420 g19 Ven p421 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU adaptation strategy package. This package consists of the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU adaptation strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU adaptation strategy is to allow 'Better informed decision-making', which will be achieved by bridging knowledge gaps and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for climate adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include 'Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies' and 'Promoting action by Member States'. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many also have prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The European Commission also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the European Commission presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU adaptation strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted the EU's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p422 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp423 (dp424 g19 Ven p425 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p426 sbtp427 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp428 (dp429 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/northward-movement-of-marine-species-2 p430 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp431 (dp432 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/northward-movement-of-marine-species-2/assessment p433 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp434 (dp435 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM015 p436 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp437 (dp438 g19 Ven p439 sg20 Nsg11 VDistribution shifts of marine species p440 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp441 (dp442 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the regional distribution of marine organisms in European seas? p443 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp444 (dp445 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Distribution shifts of marine species \u000a Increases in regional sea temperatures have triggered a major northwards expansion of warmer water plankton and a northwards retreat of colder water plankton in the North-east Atlantic. This northerly movement has amounted to about 10 ° latitude (1 100 km) over the past 40 years, and it seems to have accelerated since 2000. \u000a Sub-tropical species are occurring with increasing frequency in Europe\u2019s seas, and sub-Arctic species are receding northwards. \u000a Wild fish stocks are responding to changing temperatures and food supply by changing their distribution. This can have impacts on those local communities that depend on those fish stocks. \u000a Further changes in the distribution of marine species, including fish stocks, are expected with the projected climate change, but quantitative projections of these distribution changes are not widely available. \u000a climate change CLIM CLIM015 015 p446 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp447 (dp448 g19 Ven p449 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p450 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp451 (dp452 g19 Ven p453 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p454 sbtp455 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp456 (dp457 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-flow-3 p458 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp459 (dp460 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-flow-3/assessment p461 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp462 (dp463 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM016 p464 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp465 (dp466 g19 Ven p467 sg20 Nsg11 VRiver flow p468 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp469 (dp470 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in mean river flow in different seasons across Europe? p471 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp472 (dp473 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment River flow \u000a Available studies suggest that run-off in near-natural rivers during the period 1963\u20132000 increased in western and northern Europe, in particular in winter, and decreased in southern and parts of eastern Europe, in particular in summer. However, comprehensive observation data on river flows are not available across Europe. \u000a Long-term trends in river flows due to climate change are difficult to detect because of substantial interannual and decadal variability, as well as modifications to natural water flows arising from water abstractions, morphological changes (such as man-made reservoirs) and land-use changes. \u000a Climate change is projected to result in significant changes in the seasonality of river flows across Europe. Summer flows are projected to decrease in most of Europe, including in regions where annual flows are projected to increase. Where precipitation shifts from snow to rain, spring and summer peak flow will shift to earlier in the season. \u000a change in river flow change in streamflow climate change CLIM CLIM016 016 p474 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp475 (dp476 g19 Ven p477 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p478 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp479 (dp480 g19 Ven p481 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p482 sbtp483 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp484 (dp485 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-floods-3 p486 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp487 (dp488 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-floods-3/assessment p489 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp490 (dp491 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM017 p492 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp493 (dp494 g19 Ven p495 sg20 Nsg11 VRiver floods p496 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp497 (dp498 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in river floods across Europe? p499 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp500 (dp501 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment River floods \u000a Annual river floods increased in north-western and parts of central Europe but decreased in southern and north-eastern Europe over the period 1960-2010 because of climate change. \u000a \u000a \u000a Future climate change is projected to increase the occurrence and frequency of once-in-a-century river floods in most regions of Europe, with the exception of parts of northern Europe, southern Spain and Turkey. Pluvial floods and flash floods, which are triggered by intense local precipitation events, are likely to become more frequent throughout Europe. \u000a \u000a \u000a River floods are among the most damaging extreme climate events in Europe. Under a high-emissions scenario, climate change could triple the direct damages from river floods during the 21st century in the absence of additional adaptation measures. \u000a climate change river discharges floods CLIM CLIM017 017 p502 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp503 (dp504 g19 Ven p505 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU adaptation strategy package. This package consists of the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU adaptation strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives of the EU adaptation strategy is to allow 'Better informed decision-making'. This will be achieved by bridging knowledge gaps and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include 'Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies' and 'Promoting action by Member States'.
\u000aIn November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU adaptation strategy. The evaluation package includes a report from the Commission, a Commission staff working document, adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches and reports from the JRC Peseta III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted the EU's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p506 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp507 (dp508 g19 Ven p509 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p510 sbtp511 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp512 (dp513 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-flow-drought-3 p514 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp515 (dp516 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/river-flow-drought-3/assessment p517 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp518 (dp519 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM018 p520 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp521 (dp522 g19 Ven p523 sg20 Nsg11 VMeteorological and hydrological droughts in Europe p524 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp525 (dp526 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in meteorological droughts (i.e. precipitation deficit) and hydrological droughts (i.e. low runoff or river flow deficit) across Europe? p527 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp528 (dp529 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Meteorological and hydrological droughts in Europe \u000a Drought is a recurrent feature of the European climate that affects considerable fractions of the European population each year. \u000a The frequency and severity of meteorological and hydrological droughts have increased in most parts of Europe. Different drought indices agree that the increase is greatest in southern Europe. \u000a Available studies project further increases in the frequency, duration and severity of meteorological and hydrological droughts for most of Europe during the 21st century, except for parts of central-eastern and north-eastern Europe. The greatest increase in drought conditions is projected for southern Europe where it will increase competition between different water users, such as agriculture, industry, tourism and households. \u000a runoff climate change drought precipitation hydrological drought CLIM CLIM018 018 p530 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp531 (dp532 g19 Ven p533 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making. This shall be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States.
\u000aIn November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy. The evaluation package includes a Report from the Commission, a Commission Staff Working Document, the Adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches, and the reports from the JRC PESETA III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation. In November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p534 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp535 (dp536 g19 Ven p537 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p538 sbtp539 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp540 (dp541 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-temperature-2 p542 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp543 (dp544 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-temperature-2/assessment p545 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp546 (dp547 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM019 p548 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp549 (dp550 g19 Ven p551 sg20 Nsg11 VWater temperature p552 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp553 (dp554 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in water temperature of rivers and lakes across Europe? p555 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp556 (dp557 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Water temperature \u000a Water temperatures in major European rivers have increased by 1\u20133 °C over the last century. Several time series show increasing lake and river temperatures all over Europe since the early 1900s. \u000a Lake and river surface water temperatures are projected to increase further with projected increases in air temperature. \u000a Increased water temperature can result in marked changes in species composition and functioning of aquatic ecosystems. \u000a climate change impacts rivers and lake temperature CLIM CLIM019 019 p558 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp559 (dp560 g19 Ven p561 sg20 Nsg11 VPreparing for climate change is a major challenge for water management in Europe, and information on changes in water temperature is relevant in relation to the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Climate change is not explicitly included in the text of the WFD, but water management under the WFD will have to deal with the challenges posed by climate change. The stepwise and cyclical approach of the WFD River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) process makes it well suited to adaptively manage climate change impacts. In particular, the review of RBMPs every six years establishes a mechanism to prepare for and adapt to climate change.
\u000aIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p562 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp563 (dp564 g19 Ven p565 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p566 sbtp567 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp568 (dp569 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/distribution-of-plant-species-2 p570 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp571 (dp572 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/distribution-of-plant-species-2/assessment p573 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp574 (dp575 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM022 p576 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp577 (dp578 g19 Ven p579 sg20 Nsg11 VDistribution shifts of plant and animal species p580 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp581 (dp582 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow does climate change influence the distribution of plant and animal species in Europe? p583 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp584 (dp585 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Distribution shifts of plant and animal species \u000a Observed climate change is having significant impacts on the distribution of European flora and fauna, with distribution changes of several hundred kilometres projected over the 21st century. These impacts include northwards and uphill range shifts, as well as local and regional extinctions of species. \u000a The migration of many species is lagging behind the changes in climate owing to intrinsic limitations, habitat use and fragmentation, and other obstacles, suggesting that they are unable to keep pace with the speed of climate change. Observed and modelled differences between actual and required migration rates may lead to a progressive decline in European biodiversity. \u000a Climate change is likely to exacerbate the problem of invasive species in Europe. As climatic conditions change, some locations may become more favourable to previously harmless alien species, which then become invasive and have negative impacts on their new environments. \u000a Climate change is affecting the interaction of species that depend on each other for food or other reasons. It can disrupt established interactions but also generate novel ones. \u000a bumblebee areas biodiversity climate change bumblebee species scenarios butterflies bise birds CLIM CLIM022 022 p586 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp587 (dp588 g19 Ven p589 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p590 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp591 (dp592 g19 Ven p593 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p594 sbtp595 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp596 (dp597 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/plant-phenology-2 p598 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp599 (dp600 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/plant-phenology-2/assessment p601 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp602 (dp603 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM023 p604 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp605 (dp606 g19 Ven p607 sg20 Nsg11 VPhenology of plant and animal species p608 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp609 (dp610 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the seasonal cycle of plants and animals in Europe? p611 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp612 (dp613 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Phenology of plant and animal species \u000a The timing of seasonal events has changed across Europe. A general trend towards earlier spring phenological stages (spring advancement) has been shown in many plant and animal species, mainly due to changes in climate conditions. \u000a As a consequence of climate-induced changes in plant phenology, the pollen season starts on average 10 days earlier than it did and is longer than it was in the 1960s. \u000a The life cycles of many animal groups have advanced in recent decades, with events occurring earlier in the year, including frogs spawning, birds nesting and the arrival of migrant birds and butterflies. This advancement is attributed primarily to a warming climate. \u000a The breeding season of many thermophilic insects (such as butterflies, dragonflies and bark beetles) has been lengthening, allowing, in principle, more generations to be produced per year. \u000a The observed trends are expected to continue into the future. However, simple extrapolations of current phenological trends may be misleading because the observed relationship between temperature and phenological events may change in the future. \u000a climate change bise species specific trends CLIM CLIM023 023 p614 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp615 (dp616 g19 Ven p617 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p618 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp619 (dp620 g19 Ven p621 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p622 sbtp623 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp624 (dp625 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/growing-season-for-agricultural-crops-2 p626 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp627 (dp628 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/growing-season-for-agricultural-crops-2/assessment p629 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp630 (dp631 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM030 p632 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp633 (dp634 g19 Ven p635 sg20 Nsg11 VGrowing season for agricultural crops p636 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp637 (dp638 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the growing season for agricultural crops? p639 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp640 (dp641 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Growing season for agricultural crops \u000a The thermal growing season for agricultural crops in Europe has lengthened by more than 10 days since 1992. The delay in the end of the growing season has been more pronounced than the advance of the start of the season. The length of the growing season has increased more in northern and eastern Europe than in western and southern Europe. \u000a The growing season is projected to increase further throughout most of Europe owing to the earlier onset of growth in spring and later senescence in autumn. \u000a The projected lengthening of the thermal growing season would allow a northwards expansion of warm-season crops to areas that were not previously suitable. In parts of southern Europe (e.g. Spain), warmer conditions will allow crop cultivation to be shifted to the winter. \u000a climate agriculture atmosphere CLIM CLIM030 030 p642 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp643 (dp644 g19 Ven p645 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p646 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp647 (dp648 g19 Ven p649 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p650 sbtp651 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp652 (dp653 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/timing-of-the-cycle-of-2 p654 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp655 (dp656 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/timing-of-the-cycle-of-2/assessment p657 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp658 (dp659 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM031 p660 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp661 (dp662 g19 Ven p663 sg20 Nsg11 VAgrophenology p664 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp665 (dp666 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the seasonal cycle of agricultural crops across Europe? p667 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp668 (dp669 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Agrophenology \u000a The flowering of several perennial and annual crops has advanced by about two days per decade during the last 50 years. \u000a Changes in crop phenology are affecting crop production and the relative performance of different crop species and varieties. The shortening of the grain-filling phase of cereals and oilseed crops can be particularly detrimental to yield. \u000a Shortening of the growth phases of many crops is expected to continue, but this may be altered by selecting other crop cultivars and changing planting dates, which in some cases can lead to longer growth periods. \u000a climate agriculture atmosphere CLIM CLIM031 031 p670 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp671 (dp672 g19 Ven p673 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p674 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp675 (dp676 g19 Ven p677 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p678 sbtp679 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp680 (dp681 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/crop-yield-variability-2 p682 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp683 (dp684 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/crop-yield-variability-2/assessment p685 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp686 (dp687 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM032 p688 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp689 (dp690 g19 Ven p691 sg20 Nsg11 VWater-limited crop yield p692 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp693 (dp694 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the water-limited productivity of agricultural crops across Europe? p695 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp696 (dp697 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Water-limited crop yield \u000a Yields of several rainfed crops are levelling off (e.g. wheat in some European countries) or decreasing (e.g. grapes in Spain), whereas yields of other crops (e.g. maize in northern Europe) are increasing. These changes are attributed partly to observed climate change, in particular warming. \u000a Extreme climatic events, including droughts and heat waves, have negatively affected crop productivity in Europe during the first decade of the 21st century. \u000a Future climate change could lead to both decreases and increases in average yield, depending on the crop type and the climatic and management conditions in the region. There is a general pattern of projected increases in productivity in northern Europe and reductions in southern Europe, but with differences between crop types. \u000a Projected increases in extreme climatic events are expected to increase crop yield variability and to lead to yield reductions in the future throughout Europe. \u000a wheat climate change agriculture crop yield CLIM CLIM032 032 p698 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp699 (dp700 g19 Ven p701 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p702 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp703 (dp704 g19 Ven p705 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p706 sbtp707 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp708 (dp709 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-requirement-2 p710 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp711 (dp712 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-requirement-2/assessment p713 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp714 (dp715 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM033 p716 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp717 (dp718 g19 Ven p719 sg20 Nsg11 VCrop water demand p720 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp721 (dp722 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting the water requirement of agricultural crops across Europe? p723 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp724 (dp725 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Crop water demand \u000a Climate change led to an increase in the crop water demand and thus the crop water deficit from 1995 to 2015 in large parts of southern and eastern Europe; a decrease has been estimated for parts of north-western Europe. \u000a The projected increases in temperature will lead to increased evapotranspiration rates, thereby increasing crop water demand across Europe. This increase may partly be alleviated through reduced transpiration at higher atmospheric CO 2 levels. \u000a The impact of increasing water requirements is expected to be most acute in southern and central Europe, where the crop water deficit and irrigation requirements are projected to increase. This may lead to an expansion of irrigation systems, even in regions currently without irrigation systems. However, this expansion may be constrained by projected reductions in water availability and increased demand from other sectors and for other uses. \u000a crops climate change crop water requirement grain maize crop water deficit CLIM CLIM033 033 p726 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp727 (dp728 g19 Ven p729 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p730 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp731 (dp732 g19 Ven p733 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p734 sbtp735 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp736 (dp737 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-growth-2 p738 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp739 (dp740 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-growth-2/assessment p741 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp742 (dp743 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM034 p744 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp745 (dp746 g19 Ven p747 sg20 Nsg11 VForest composition and distribution p748 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp749 (dp750 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting forest composition and distribution in Europe? p751 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp752 (dp753 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Forest composition and distribution \u000a Range shifts in forest tree species due to climate change have been observed towards higher altitudes and latitudes. These changes considerably affect the forest structure and the functioning of forest ecosystems and their services. \u000a Future climate change and increasing CO2 concentrations are expected to affect site suitability, productivity, species composition and biodiversity. In general, forest growth is projected to increase in northern Europe and to decrease in southern Europe, but with substantial regional variation. Cold-adapted coniferous tree species are projected to lose large fractions of their ranges to more drought-adapted broadleaf species. \u000a The projected changes will have an impact on the goods and services that forests provide. For example, the value of forest land in Europe is projected to decrease between 14 and 50 % during the 21st century. \u000a climate change trees scenarios forest ecosystem changes in habitat suitability bise plant functional type composition CLIM CLIM034 034 p754 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp755 (dp756 g19 Ven p757 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
Further objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
In September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
In November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
No targets have been specified.
p762 sbtp763 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp764 (dp765 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-fire-danger-3 p766 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp767 (dp768 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-fire-danger-3/assessment p769 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp770 (dp771 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM035 p772 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp773 (dp774 g19 Ven p775 sg20 Nsg11 VForest fires p776 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp777 (dp778 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting forest fire risk in Europe? p779 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp780 (dp781 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Forest fires \u000a The burnt area in the Mediterranean region has shown a slightly decreasing trend since 1980, but with high interannual variability; the meteorological fire hazard has increased over the same period as a result of global climate change. These opposite trends suggest that efforts to improve fire management have generally been successful. \u000a Large forest fires in recent years have affected various regions in northern and western Europe in which fires were not prevalent in the past. More European countries suffered from large forest fires in 2018 than ever before, and Sweden experienced the worst fire season in reporting history. The unprecedented forest fires in several European countries in 2017 and 2018 coincided with record droughts and heatwaves in these years. \u000a More severe fire weather and, as a consequence, substantial expansion of the fire-prone area and longer fire seasons are projected in most regions of Europe, in particular for high emissions scenarios. The increase in fire danger is projected to be particularly large in western-central Europe, but the absolute fire danger remains highest in southern Europe. Adaptation measures, such as improved fire prevention and suppression, can substantially reduce fire risks. \u000a forest fires projections CLIM CLIM035 035 p782 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp783 (dp784 g19 Ven p785 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU adaptation strategy package. This package consists of the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU adaptation strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives of the EU adaptation strategy is to allow \u2018Better informed decision-making\u2019. This will be achieved by bridging knowledge gaps and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for climate adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include \u2018Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies\u2019 and \u2018Promoting action by Member States\u2019.
In November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU adaptation strategy. The evaluation package includes a report from the Commission, a Commission staff working document, the adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches and reports from the JRC Peseta III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
In November 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted the EU's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
No targets have been specified.
p790 sbtp791 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp792 (dp793 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heat-and-health-2 p794 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp795 (dp796 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heat-and-health-2/assessment p797 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp798 (dp799 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM036 p800 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp801 (dp802 g19 Ven p803 sg20 Nsg11 VExtreme temperatures and health p804 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp805 (dp806 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the health effects of temperature extremes across Europe, and how are they changing? p807 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp808 (dp809 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Extreme temperatures and health \u000a Heat waves and extreme cold spells are associated with decreases in general population well-being and with increases in mortality and morbidity, especially in vulnerable population groups. Temperature thresholds for health impacts differ according to the region and season. \u000a The number of heat extremes has substantially increased across Europe in recent decades. Heat waves have caused tens of thousands of premature deaths in Europe since 2000. \u000a It is virtually certain that the length, frequency and intensity of heat waves will increase in the future. This increase will lead to a substantial increase in mortality over the next decades, especially in vulnerable population groups, unless adaptation measures are taken. \u000a Cold-related mortality is projected to decrease owing to better social, economic and housing conditions in many countries in Europe. There is inconclusive evidence about whether or not the projected warming will lead to a further substantial decrease in cold-related mortality. \u000a people and climate change mortality temperatures temperature mortality CLIM CLIM036 036 p810 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp811 (dp812 g19 Ven p813 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p814 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp815 (dp816 g19 Ven p817 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p818 sbtp819 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp820 (dp821 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/vector-borne-diseases-2 p822 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp823 (dp824 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/vector-borne-diseases-2/assessment p825 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp826 (dp827 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM037 p828 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp829 (dp830 g19 Ven p831 sg20 Nsg11 VVector-borne diseases p832 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp833 (dp834 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the health effects of vector-borne diseases across Europe, and how are they changing? p835 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp836 (dp837 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Vector-borne diseases \u000a The transmission cycles of vector-borne diseases are sensitive to climatic factors, but disease risks are also affected by factors such as land use, vector control, human behaviour, population movements and public health capacities. \u000a Climate change is regarded as the principal factor behind the observed move of the tick species Ixodes ricinus \u2014 the vector of Lyme borreliosis and tick-borne encephalitis in Europe \u2014 to higher latitudes and altitudes. Climate change is projected to lead to further northwards and upwards shifts in the distribution of Ixodes ricinus. \u000a It is generally suspected that climate change has played (and will continue to play) a role in the expansion of other disease vectors, notably the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus), which can disseminate several diseases including dengue, chikungunya and Zika, and Phlebotomus species of sandflies, which transmit leishmaniasis. \u000a The unprecedented upsurge in the number of human West Nile fever infections in the summer of 2010 in south-eastern Europe was preceded by extreme hot spells in this region. High temperature anomalies in July were identified as contributing factors to the recurrent outbreaks in the subsequent years. \u000a climate chikungunya transmission diseases west nile fever climate change human health climate suitability CLIM CLIM037 037 p838 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp839 (dp840 g19 Ven p841 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p842 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp843 (dp844 g19 Ven p845 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p846 sbtp847 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp848 (dp849 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-and-food-borne-diseases-1 p850 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp851 (dp852 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-and-food-borne-diseases-1/assessment p853 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp854 (dp855 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM038 p856 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp857 (dp858 g19 Ven p859 sg20 Nsg11 VWater- and food-borne diseases p860 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp861 (dp862 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting water and food-borne diseases? p863 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp864 (dp865 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Water- and food-borne diseases \u000a It is not possible to assess whether past climate change has already affected water- and food-borne diseases in Europe, but the sensitivity of pathogens to climate factors suggest that climate change could be having effects on these diseases. \u000a The number of vibriosis infections, which can be life-threatening, has increased substantially in Baltic Sea states since 1980. This increase has been linked to observed increases in sea surface temperature, which has improved environmental conditions for Vibrio species blooms in marine waters. The unprecedented number of vibriosis infections in 2014 has been attributed to the unprecedented 2014 heat wave in the Baltic region. \u000a Increased temperatures could increase the risk of salmonellosis. \u000a The risk of campylobacteriosis and cryptosporidiosis could increase in those regions where precipitation or extreme flooding is projected to increase. \u000a Climate change can have an impact on food safety hazards throughout the food chain. \u000a baltic sea climate change health infections CLIM CLIM038 038 p866 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp867 (dp868 g19 Ven p869 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p870 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp871 (dp872 g19 Ven p873 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p874 sbtp875 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp876 (dp877 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/direct-losses-from-weather-disasters-4 p878 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp879 (dp880 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/direct-losses-from-weather-disasters-4/assessment p881 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp882 (dp883 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM039 | CSI042 p884 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp885 (dp886 g19 Ven p887 sg20 Nsg11 VEconomic losses from climate-related extremes in Europe p888 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp889 (dp890 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp891 (dp892 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Economic losses from climate-related extremes in Europe Between 1980 and 2019, climate-related extremes caused economic losses totaling an estimated EUR 446 billion in the EEA member countries. Although analysing trends in economic losses is difficult, partly as a result of high variability from year to year, climate-related extremes are becoming more common and, without mitigating action, could result in even greater losses in the coming years. The EU adaptation strategy aims to build resilience and ensure that Europe is well prepared to manage the risks and adapt to the impacts of climate change, thus minimising economic losses and other harms. economic losses disasters climate losses insurance natural hazards CSI CSI042 CLIM CLIM039 042 039 p893 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp894 (dp895 g19 Ven p896 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission presented the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/0216). One of the objectives is better informed decision-making, by further developing Climate-ADAPT as the 'first-stop shop' for adaptation information in Europe. In 2018, the European Commission published an evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy (COM(2018) 738) and a revised version is foreseen to be published in 2021.
\u000aArticle 6 of Decision No. 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism obliges the EU Member States to develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national levels and to make a summary of the relevant elements thereof. It is summarised in an Overview of natural and man-made disaster risks the European Union may face (SWD/2020/0330).
\u000aThe Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (UN, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030), including \u2018Understanding disaster risk\u2019, requires that the signatory countries systematically evaluate, record, share and publicly account for disaster losses and understand the economic impacts at national and sub-national levels.
p897 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp898 (dp899 g19 Ven p900 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets has been identified for this indicator
p901 sbtp902 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp903 (dp904 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/ocean-acidification-3 p905 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp906 (dp907 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/ocean-acidification-3/assessment p908 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp909 (dp910 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM043 p911 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp912 (dp913 g19 Ven p914 sg20 Nsg11 VOcean acidification p915 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp916 (dp917 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is the acidity of Europe's ocean surface waters changing? p918 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp919 (dp920 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Ocean acidification \u000a Currently, the ocean takes up about one quarter of global CO 2 emissions from human activities. The uptake of CO 2 in the sea causes ocean acidification, as the pH of sea water declines. \u000a Ocean surface pH declined from 8.2 to below 8.1 over the industrial era as a result of an increase in atmospheric CO 2 concentrations. This decline corresponds to an increase in oceanic acidity of about 30 %. \u000a In recent decades, ocean acidification has been occurring 100 times faster than during natural events over the past 55 million years. These rapid chemical changes are an added pressure on marine ecosystems. \u000a Observed reductions in surface water pH are nearly identical across the global ocean and throughout European seas, except for variations near coasts. The reduction in pH in the northernmost European seas, i.e. the Norwegian Sea and the Greenland Sea, is larger than the global average. \u000a Ocean acidification has wide-ranging impacts on marine ecosystems. A reduction in carbonate availability reduces the rate of calcification of marine calcifying organisms, such as reef-building corals, shellfish and plankton. Ocean acidification has already affected the deep ocean, particularly at high latitudes. \u000a Changes in pH affect biological processes, e.g. enzyme activities and photosynthesis, which in turn affects primary production. These changes may be exacerbated by rising seawater temperatures. \u000a Changes in marine primary production will have an impact on the global carbon cycle and the absorption of atmospheric CO 2 in the ocean, as well as on the overall capacity of ocean to mitigate climate change. \u000a effectsModels consistently project further ocean acidification worldwide. Ocean surface pH is projected to decrease to values between 8.05 and 7.75 by the end of the 21st century, depending on future CO 2 emission levels. The largest projected decline represents more than a doubling in acidity. \u000a The combined effects of elevated seawater temperatures, deoxygenation and acidification are expected to have negative effects on entire marine ecosystems and cause changes in food webs and marine production, and will also result in economic losses. \u000a ph acidification sea surface CLIM CLIM043 043 p921 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp922 (dp923 g19 Ven p924 sg20 Nsg11 VThe 2008 Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD; Directive 2008/56/EC) is the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy and its main driver towards clean, healthy and productive European seas. The MSFD aims to protect and restore the marine environment and phase out pollution, leading to no significant impacts on or risks to marine biodiversity, human health and the legitimate use of marine resources. The MSFD requires the achievement of 'good environmental status' (GES) for EU marine waters by 2020. Acidification is addressed under MSFD Descriptor 7 (Hydrographic conditions).
\u000aIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to enable better-informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as a \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; (2) relevant research; (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans; and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation.
\u000aStaff working document SWD(2013) 133 Climate change adaptation, coastal and marine issues was published alongside the EU Strategy, The paper provided an overview of the main impacts of climate change on coastal zones and marine issues, including environmental, economic and social systems aspects. The document also pointed out knowledge gaps and existing EU efforts to best adapt to the impacts of climate change on coastal zones and marine issues.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation. The planetary boundary framework identified nine processes that regulate the stability and resilience of the Earth system \u2014 \u2018planetary life support systems\u2019. The framework proposes precautionary quantitative planetary boundaries within which humanity can continue to develop and thrive, also referred to as a \u2018safe operating space\u2019. It suggests that crossing these boundaries increases the risk of generating large-scale abrupt or irreversible environmental changes that could shift the Earth system to states that are detrimental to or catastrophic for human development.
\u000aOcean acidification is identified as one of the nine planetary boundaries.
\u000aThe EC published an Evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy in November 2018. The evaluation package comprises a Report on the implementation of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM(2018)738), the Evaluation of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (SWD(2018)461), and the Adaptation preparedness scoreboard Country fiches (SWD(2018)460). The evaluation found that the EU Adaptation Strategy has been a reference point to prepare Europe for the climate impacts to come, at all levels.
\u000aThe European Green Deal, communicated by the Commission on 11 December 2019, sets out a new growth strategy that aims to transform the EU into a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy, where there are no net emissions of greenhouse gases in 2050 and where economic growth is decoupled from resource use. It also aims to protect, conserve and enhance the Union's natural capital, and protect the health and well-being of citizens from environment-related risks and impacts. At the same time, this transition must be just and inclusive, leaving no one behind.
\u000aOn 4 March 2020, the Commission proposed a European climate law to ensure a climate neutral European Union by 2050. The law is designed to be the basis for adaptable management, with a focus on the implementation of mitigation measures, monitoring of progress and improvement of management approaches if needed.
\u000aAcidification is also one of the topics addressed in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda/). One of the targets under SDG 14 ('Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development\u2019), is SDG 14.3 (\u2018Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification, including through enhanced scientific cooperation at all levels\u2019).
p925 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp926 (dp927 g19 Ven p928 sg20 Nsg11 VNo binding targets have been specified. Under SDG 14.3, the target to minimise and address the impacts of ocean acidification by 2030 was formulated.
p929 sbtp930 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp931 (dp932 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/floods-and-health-1 p933 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp934 (dp935 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/floods-and-health-1/assessment p936 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp937 (dp938 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM046 p939 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp940 (dp941 g19 Ven p942 sg20 Nsg11 VFloods and health p943 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp944 (dp945 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the health effects of floods across Europe? p946 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp947 (dp948 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Floods and health \u000a River and coastal flooding have affected many millions of people in Europe since 2000. Flooding affects human health through drowning, heart attacks, injuries, infections, exposure to chemical hazards and mental health consequences. Disruption of services, including health services, safe water, sanitation and transportation ways, plays a major role in vulnerability. \u000a Observed increases in heavy precipitation and extreme coastal water levels have increased the risk of river and coastal flooding in many European regions. \u000a In the absence of additional adaptation, the projected increases in extreme precipitation events and in sea level would substantially increase the health risks associated with river and coastal flooding in Europe. \u000a people and climate change floods climate deaths CLIM CLIM046 046 p949 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp950 (dp951 g19 Ven p952 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerables ectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p953 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp954 (dp955 g19 Ven p956 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p957 sbtp958 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp959 (dp960 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heating-degree-days-2 p961 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp962 (dp963 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heating-degree-days-2/assessment p964 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp965 (dp966 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM047 p967 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp968 (dp969 g19 Ven p970 sg20 Nsg11 VHeating and cooling degree days p971 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp972 (dp973 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is climate change affecting total and peak energy demand for space heating and cooling across Europe? p974 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp975 (dp976 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Heating and cooling degree days \u000a The annual population-weighted heating degree days (HDD) decreased by 6 % between the periods 1950\u20131980 and 1981\u20132017; the decrease during the period 1981\u20132017 was on average 6.5 HDDs per year. The largest decrease occurred in northern Europe and possibly in Italy. \u000a The annual population-weighted cooling degree days (CDD) increased by 33 % between the periods 1950\u20131980 and 1981\u20132017; the increase during the period 1981\u20132017 was on average 0.9 HDDs per year. The largest increase occurred in southern Europe. \u000a The observed trend in HDDs and CDDs is projected to continue throughout the 21st century. The largest absolute decreases in HDDs are expected in northern and south-eastern Europe; the largest absolute increases in CDDs are expected in southern Europe. \u000a The decrease in HDDs in Europe is projected to be much larger than the increase in CDDs in absolute terms. However, a given change in CDDs generally has larger economic impacts than the same change in HDDs, because cooling is almost exclusively produced from electricity, whereas heating is often derived from energy carriers with lower specific costs and primary energy requirements. \u000a The projected increase in cooling demand in southern Europe may further exacerbate peaks in electricity demand in summer. This can threaten the stability of electricity networks during summer heatwaves, unless appropriate adaptation measures are taken. \u000a cooling heating energy CLIM CLIM047 047 p977 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp978 (dp979 g19 Ven p980 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is 'Better informed decision-making'. This shall be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018first-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; (2) relevant research; (3) EU, transnational, national and sub-national adaptation strategies and plans; and (4) adaptation case studies. It was relaunched in early 2019 with a new design and updated content. Further objectives include 'Promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies' and 'Promoting action by Member States'.
\u000aMost EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn November 2018, the Commission published its evaluation of the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy. The evaluation package includes a Report from the Commission, a Commission Staff Working Document, the Adaptation preparedness scoreboard country fiches, and the reports from the JRC PESETA III project. This evaluation includes recommendations for the further development and implementation of adaptation policies at all levels.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
\u000aIn February 2016, the Commission published an EU Strategy on Heating and Cooling, which aims to decarbonise the heating and cooling of buildings through different technologies and measures, in line with wider EU climate and energy policies.
p981 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp982 (dp983 g19 Ven p984 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p985 sbtp986 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp987 (dp988 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/emissions-and-consumption-of-fluorinated-3 p989 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp990 (dp991 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/emissions-and-consumption-of-fluorinated-3/assessment p992 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp993 (dp994 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM048 | CSI044 p995 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp996 (dp997 g19 Ven p998 sg20 Nsg11 VHydrofluorocarbon phase-down in Europe p999 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1000 (dp1001 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHydrofluorocarbon phase-down in Europe, aggregated level | Hydrofluorocarbon phase-down in Europe, disaggregated level p1002 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1003 (dp1004 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Hydrofluorocarbon phase-down in Europe After increasing for 13 years, fluorinated greenhouse gas (F-gas) emissions in the EU decreased for the first time in 2015, and fell by 5 % in 2018 compared to 2017. This can be partly attributed to the EU-wide hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) phase-down set out in the F-gas Regulation, which aims to reduce F-gas emissions and mitigate global warming. HFCs account for the majority of F-gas emissions and the EU is on track to meet targets and phase down HFC use by 2030. It is also on track to meet its international obligation to reduce HFC consumption, in effect since 2019, under the Montreal Protocol. reporting obligations f-gases global warming climate change CSI CSI044 CLIM CLIM048 044 048 p1005 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1006 (dp1007 g19 Ven p1008 sg20 Nsg11 VFluorinated gases contribute to global warming, and emissions of fluorinated gases, which are not covered by the Montreal Protocol, are included under the UNFCCC. Since 2015, emission reporting for the full time series since 1990 has been carried out in accordance with the 2006 IPCC guidelines and uses the global warming potentials (GWPs) of the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report (AR4). For a list of fluorinated gases reportable under the UNFCCC, please refer to the indicator definition. Companies reporting under the 'old' EU F-gas Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 842/2006, applicable from 2007-2014) and under the revised, \u2018new\u2019, F-gas Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 517/2014, applicable since 2015) must cover an extended list of fluorinated gases.
\u000aAt European level, two key legislative instruments focus on fluorinated gases:
\u000a\u000a
The F-gas Regulation takes several approaches to reducing F-gas emissions:
\u000aThe MAC Directive requires the gradual phase-out of F-gases with a GWP of >150 in new systems in the period 2011-2017 in the EU.
\u000aAt global level, the Montreal Protocol was amended to regulate HFCs in October 2016 in Kigali, Rwanda (the 'Kigali Amendment'). Both developed and developing countries have taken on mandatory commitments to reduce the production and consumption of HFCs in the next three decades. Under the amended protocol, for the EU and other developed countries, HFC consumption is limited to 90 % of the baseline starting in 2019, with further reduction steps planned until 15 % of the baseline is reached from 2036 onwards.
\u000aThe 'new' F-Gas Regulation 517/2014 maintains many measures of the 'old' F-Gas Regulation 842/2006, in particular related to leak prevention, recovery, certification of technicians and selected restrictions on the use and marketing of F-gases. Large reductions in F-gas use and emissions are expected from a new measure, which will progressively cap allowed sales of HFCs on the EU market ('phase-down'). Reductions are also expected from bans of F-gases with a high Global Warming Potential (GWP).
p1009 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1010 (dp1011 g19 Ven p1012 sg20 Nsg11 VUnder the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, no separate targets for F-gases have been specified.
\u000aIn the EU context, the revised, 'new', F-gas Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 517/2014) aims to reduce emissions by two thirds of the 2010 level by 2030.
p1013 sbtp1014 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1015 (dp1016 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/production-and-consumption-of-ozone-4 p1017 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1018 (dp1019 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/production-and-consumption-of-ozone-4/assessment p1020 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1021 (dp1022 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM049 p1023 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1024 (dp1025 g19 Ven p1026 sg20 Nsg11 VGlobal and European consumption of ozone-depleting substances p1027 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1028 (dp1029 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1030 (dp1031 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Global and European consumption of ozone-depleting substances Between 1986 and 2002, the consumption of ozone-depleting substances declined significantly, falling from 343 000 ozone-depleting potential tonnes to around zero in the 28 EU Member States. This was driven by the implementation of the 1987 Montreal Protocol. Since the early 1990s, the EU has taken additional measures \u2014 set out in the EU regulation \u2014 to limit ozone-depleting substances, and has exceeded its commitments under the Montreal Protocol. Although some progress has been made towards reversing the depletion of the ozone hole, more must be done to ensure that recovery continues. ozone air pollution climate change ozone depleting substances CLIM CLIM049 049 p1032 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1033 (dp1034 g19 Ven p1035 sg20 Nsg11 VThe 1987 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Montreal Protocol is widely recognised as one of the most successful multilateral environmental agreements to date. Its implementation has led to a global decrease in the impact of ODS on the atmosphere. The agreement covers the phase-out of over 200 individual ODS including CFCs, halons, CTC, TCA, HCFCs, HBFCs, BCM and MB. The Montreal Protocol controls the consumption and production of these substances, not their emissions.
\u000aFollowing the signing of the Montreal Protocol and its subsequent amendments and adjustments, policy measures have been taken to limit or phase out the production and consumption of ODS to protect the stratospheric ozone layer against depletion. This indicator tracks the progress of EU Member States towards this limiting or phasing out of ODS consumption.
\u000aFor the EU, the ratification dates were the following:
\u000a| \u000a Treaty \u000a | \u000a Date of ratification \u000a |
|---|---|
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 17 October 1988 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 16 December 1988 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 20 December 1991 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 20 November 1995 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 17 November 2000 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a\u000a | \u000a\u000a 25 March 2002 \u000a | \u000a
EU Member States have made tremendous progress in reducing the consumption and production of ODS since the signing of the Montreal Protocol. In that time, ODS production has fallen from over half a million ODP tonnes to practically zero, not including production for exempted uses. Since 2009, EU Member States have also been subject to the more stringent EU ODS Regulation (1005/2009/EC as amended by 744/2010/EU), which applies to additional substances and accelerates the phase-out of the remaining ODS in the EU.
p1036 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1037 (dp1038 g19 Ven p1039 sg20 Nsg11 VThe international target under the ozone conventions and protocols is the complete phase-out of ozone-depleting substances (ODS).
p1040 sbtp1041 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1042 (dp1043 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emission-trends-7 p1044 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1045 (dp1046 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emission-trends-7/assessment p1047 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1048 (dp1049 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM050 | CSI010 p1050 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1051 (dp1052 g19 Ven p1053 sg20 Nsg11 VTotal greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe p1054 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1055 (dp1056 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1057 (dp1058 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Total greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe Greenhouse gas emissions in the EU-27 decreased by 24 % between 1990 and 2019, exceeding the target of a 20 % reduction from 1990 levels by 2020. By 2030, the projections based on current and planned measures of the EU-27 show an emission reduction of 36 %, which is a rather conservative outlook in the absence of new measures. Further effort will certainly be necessary with a view to achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and the proposed increased milestone target of a 55 % reduction by 2030 (compared with 1990 and including removals). climate progress to target energy greenhouse gases trends projections energy efficiency renewable energy CSI CSI010 CLIM CLIM050 010 050 p1059 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1060 (dp1061 g19 Ven p1062 sg20 Nsg11 VThe UNFCCC sets an ultimate objective of stabilising GHG concentrations 'at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human induced) interference with the climate system.' The European Union, as a party to the UNFCCC, reports annually on the GHG emissions within the area covered by its Member States. The Annual European Union greenhouse gas inventory and inventory report, officially submitted to the UNFCCC Secretariat, is prepared on behalf of the European Commission (DG CLIMA) by the EEA and its European Topic Centre for Climate change mitigation and energy (ETC/CME), supported by the Joint Research Centre and Eurostat.
\u000aIn 2007, EU leaders committed to a 20 % reduction in EU GHG emissions by 2020 on the basis of 1990 GHG emissions. The EU 2020 Climate and Energy Package, adopted in 2009, sets a two-fold legislative framework to achieve the 20 % GHG emission reduction objective:
\u000aBuilding on the 2020 climate and energy package, the European Council adopted the 2030 climate and energy framework, which sets a target of a 40 % reduction in GHG emissions compared with 1990.
\u000aVery recently, as part of the European Green Deal, the Commission proposed to raise the 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target, including emissions and removals, to at least 55% compared to 1990. This will enable the EU to move towards a climate-neutral economy by 2050. This new long-term objective is a key element of the European Green Deal and and in line with the EU\u2019s commitment to global climate action under the Paris Agreement.
\u000aThis indicator aims to present an assessment of the EU's progress towards its 2020, 2030 and 2050 ambitions under consideration of the trends of emissions covered under the ETS, ESD and LULUCF legislation. The indicator is based on the official GHG inventories submitted by the EEA countries and the EU to the UNFCCC, as well as on the projected GHG emissions submitted by the Member States under the Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (Regulation 525/2013, MMR).
p1063 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1064 (dp1065 g19 Ven p1066 sg20 Nsg11 VEU greenhouse gas targets 2020
\u000aThe unilateral 20 % GHG reduction target, in the context of the EU Climate and Energy Package, corresponds to a 14 % decrease in emissions between 2005 and 2020. The target is to be achieved both in the sectors covered by the EU ETS (21 % reduction in EU ETS emissions compared with 2005 levels) and in the other sectors covered by national emission targets under the ESD.
\u000aThe annual ESD targets used in the indicator are consistent with the EU ETS scope for the third trading period (2013\u20132020), based on
\u000aEU greenhouse gas targets 2030
\u000aIn October 2015, the European Council adopted the '2030 climate and energy framework', setting a binding target to cut emissions in the EU territory by at least 40 % below 1990 levels by 2030 with emission cuts of
\u000aAs part of as part of the European Green Deal, the Commission proposed to raise the 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target, including emissions and removals, to at least 55% compared to 1990. This will enable the EU to move towards a climate-neutral economy by 2050. This new long-term objective is a key element of the European Green Deal and in line with the EU\u2019s commitment to global climate action under the Paris Agreement.
p1067 sbtp1068 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1069 (dp1070 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions-intensity-of p1071 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1072 (dp1073 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions-intensity-of/assessment p1074 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1075 (dp1076 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCLIM055 p1077 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1078 (dp1079 g19 Ven p1080 sg20 Nsg11 VGreenhouse gas emission intensity of fuels and biofuels for road transport in Europe p1081 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1082 (dp1083 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1084 (dp1085 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Greenhouse gas emission intensity of fuels and biofuels for road transport in Europe The EU is not on track to reduce the greenhouse gas emission intensity of fuels sold for road transport to 6 % below 2010 levels, as set out in its 2020 target. Between 2010 and 2018, the emission intensity decreased by 3.7 %, mostly due to the increased use of biofuels. Finland and Sweden are the only Member States whose emission intensities decreased by more than 6 %. If the indirect land use change effects of biofuel production are considered, the emission intensity of fuels sold in the EU actually increased between 2017 and 2018, because of the increased use of oil crops as feedstocks. fuels road transport greenhouse gas emissions biofuels greenhouse gas intensity CLIM CLIM055 055 p1086 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1087 (dp1088 g19 Ven p1089 sg20 Nsg11 V__ __
p1090 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1091 (dp1092 g19 Ven p1093 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets has been specified
p1094 sbtp1095 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1096 (dp1097 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/species-of-european-interest-2 p1098 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1099 (dp1100 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/species-of-european-interest-2/assessment p1101 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1102 (dp1103 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI007 | SEBI003 p1104 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1105 (dp1106 g19 Ven p1107 sg20 Nsg11 VSpecies of European interest p1108 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1109 (dp1110 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the conservation status of species under the Habitats Directive? | What is the progress towards Target 1 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020? | What is the status of bird populations under the Birds Directive? p1111 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1112 (dp1113 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Species of European interest The 2020 target of improving the conservation status of species covered by the Habitats Directive seems to have been met. This apparent progress, however, is largely attributable to improved data and changes in methodology. \u000a Similarly, there has been little progress towards the target for bird populations under the Birds Directive. This indicates that significant conservation efforts need to be implemented to revert current trends. \u000a At the EU level, 23 % of the assessments of species protected under the Habitats Directive indicate a favourable conservation status. At the same time, 60 % of species assessments are unfavourable. There are still significant gaps in knowledge, especially for marine species. \u000a Fish, molluscs and amphibians have a particularly high proportion of species that exhibit a deteriorating trend. \u000a The conservation status of species varies considerably from one biogeographic region to another. At Member State level, more unfavourable assessments are showing a decline than those that are improving. \u000a In the EU, over half of the bird species listed in the Birds Directive are considered to be \u2018secure\u2019, i.e. they show no foreseeable risk of extinction, decline or depletion. On the other hand, 17 % of the species listed are still threatened and another 15 % are declining or depleted. biogeographical regions eu 2020 biodiversity strategy target 1 target 1 art. 12 of the birds directive non-bird species assessments conservation status eu 2020 biodiversity strategy conservation of species habitats directive habitats directive, birds directive birds directive population trends of birds art. 17 of the habitats directive habitat directive article 17 bise birds species SEBI SEBI003 CSI CSI007 003 007 p1114 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1115 (dp1116 g19 Ven p1117 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator covers those species considered to be of European interest that are listed in Annexes II, IV and V of the Habitats Directive. It also covers all wild birds species occurring on Member State territories, as listed in the Birds Directive. This set of species appears in the annexes of the Directive because they are perceived to be under some sort of threat at an EU scale. The species set covers various taxonomic groups, trophic levels and habitats.
\u000aIndicator trends should primarily be influenced by the implementation of measures under the Habitats and Birds Directives, such as the establishment and management of the Natura 2000 network and species protection measures. Therefore, the indicator assesses the success of the Habitats Directive, one of the main legislative pillars of EU nature conservation policy.
p1118 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1119 (dp1120 g19 Ven p1121 sg20 Nsg11 VTarget 1 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 states that:
\u2018To halt the deterioration in the status of all species and habitats covered by EU nature legislation and achieve a significant and measurable improvement in their status so that, by 2020, compared to current assessments: (i) 100 % more habitat assessments and 50 % more species assessments under the Habitats Directive show an improved conservation status; and (ii) 50 % more species assessments under the Birds Directive show a secure or improved status.\u2019
The indicator is also relevant for measuring progress towards the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011\u20132020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, especially the Strategic Goals B and C: to reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use, and to improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity, respectively.
The 7th EAP and the EU Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe promote \u2018No Net Land Take\u2019 in the EU by 2050, aiming to mitigate the effect of urban sprawl. \u2018No Net Land Take\u2019 is addressed in the Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) target of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), aiming to maintain the amount and quality of land resources. LDN is promoted by Target 15.3 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which, by 2030, strives to combat desertification and to restore degraded land and soil. Land and soil are also bound to goals that address poverty reduction (SDG 1), health and well-being through reduced pollution (SDG 3), access to clean water and sanitation (SDG 6), the environmental impact of urban sprawl (SDG 11) and climate change (SDG 13). The EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 calls for restoring at least 15 % of degraded ecosystems in the Union and expanding the use of Green Infrastructure, e.g. to help overcome land fragmentation.
\u000aPolicy decisions that shape land use involve trade-offs between many sectoral interests, including industry, transport, energy, mining, agriculture and forestry. These trade-offs are eventually implemented through spatial planning and land management in the Member States. Although the subsidiarity principle assigns land and urban planning responsibilities to national and regional government levels, most European policies have a direct or indirect effect on urban development. In particular, the effective implementation of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directives has shown that they can improve the consideration of environmental aspects in planning projects, plans and programmes, contribute to more systematic and transparent planning and improve participation and consultation. The far-reaching consequences of European and other policies for spatial impacts are, however, only partially perceived and understood. Tackling these challenges needs the completion of a comprehensive knowledge base and better awareness of the complexity of the problems as currently expressed in the discussion on a \u2018territorial impact assessment\u2019 instrument (Territorial, 2010). Initiatives towards such an integrated approach, as requested in the Community strategic guidelines on cohesion 2007\u20132013 (COM(2005)0229), imply compliance with the precautionary principle, the efficient use of natural resources and the minimisation of waste and pollution, and need to be vigorously pursued and, in particular, implemented.
\u000aAt the European level, the 1999 European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), a non-binding framework that aims to coordinate various European regional policy impacts, already advocates the development of a sustainable, polycentric and balanced urban system with compact cities, and the strengthening of the partnerships between urban and rural areas; parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge; and wise management of natural areas and cultural heritage. The 2008 Green Paper on territorial cohesion and the 2007 EU Territorial Agenda and Action Plan by the Territorial Agenda of the EU and the Action programme for its implementation (COPTA, 2007) build further on the ESDP. Specific actions relevant in the field of \u2018Land\u2019, in particular are action 2.1d: \u2018Urban sprawl\u2019 and action 2.2 \u2018Territorial impact of EU policies\u2019.
\u000aThe importance of multi-functional land is also massively reinforced by the emerging policy and scientific consensus on the importance of land management practices for mitigating and adapting to climate change, as stated by the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change Activities on Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF). However, it may often be difficult to estimate greenhouse gas removals by, and emissions from land use and forestry resulting from LULUCF activities (UNFCCC). EU climate change policy addresses land use in its White paper for climate change and adaptation, using measures aimed at increasing the resilience of land-based production and ecosystems in general (COM(2009)469).
p1146 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1147 (dp1148 g19 Ven p1149 sg20 Nsg11 VWhile many European and national policies address land and soil to some extent, binding targets, incentives and measures are largely missing at the European level. The European Court of Auditors recommends to establish methodologies and a legal framework to assess land degradation and desertification, and to support the Member States to achieve land degradation neutrality by 2030 (ECA, 2018).
\u000aAlthough, there are no quantitative targets for land take for urban development at the European level, different documents reflect the need for better planning to control urban growth and the extension of infrastructures (policies relating explicitly to land use issues, and especially physical and spatial planning, have generally been the responsibility of the authorities in Member States). The European Commission's Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM(2011) 571) introduces for the first time a 'no net land take by 2050' initiative that would imply that all new urbanisation will either occur on brown-fields or that any new land take will need to be compensated by reclamation of artificial land.
\u000aMeeting the 7th EAP objective for no net land take by 2050 would require investments in land recycling, as well as halting land take. Land recycling is one way to achieve a growing urban population that consumes less land per capita. Land recycling can be achieved by constructing between buildings (densification), by constructing on brownfields (i.e. already used sites, known as grey recycling), or converting developed land into green areas (green recycling) (EEA, 2018b). Setting up green infrastructure is an important means to re-establish and maintain unsealed areas, thus to allow patches and networks of urban ecosystems to function in more sustainable cities (Chapter 3 and Chapter 17 for the role of green infrastructure). However, currently there is no legal framework or incentive to recycle urban land, despite available funding for land rehabilitation under the EU Cohesion Policy.
\u000aDemand for new urban areas may be partly satisfied by brown-field remediation. Its environmental advantages are clear: relieving pressure on rural areas and green-field sites, reducing pollution costs, more efficient energy use and natural resource consumption, facilitating economic diversification and emerging habitat (housing) requirements. Europe has several examples of regional strategies for economic regeneration and brown-field development (The OECD Territorial Outlook 2001) and the recycling of artificial surfaces in several countries reaching 30 % or more if compared with the total land take area (CORINE Land Cover 2006 results). Stronger links between EU urban and soil policies could encourage this further.
p1150 sbtp1151 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1152 (dp1153 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/nutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and-4 p1154 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1155 (dp1156 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/nutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and-4/assessment p1157 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1158 (dp1159 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI021 | MAR005 p1160 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1161 (dp1162 g19 Ven p1163 sg20 Nsg11 VNutrients in transitional, coastal and marine waters p1164 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1165 (dp1166 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre nutrient concentrations in European transitional, coastal and marine waters decreasing? p1167 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1168 (dp1169 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Nutrients in transitional, coastal and marine waters \u000a Examples of successful implementation of nutrient management strategies can be found in, for example, the Baltic Sea and the North Sea regions, where decreasing trends are observed. \u000a The highest nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations are generally observed in transitional and coastal waters of the marine (sub)regions, which reflects the influence of direct and diffuse inputs of nutrients in the upstream catchments. \u000a In the southwestern Baltic Sea, decreasing nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations were observed between 1990 and 2017. These trends illustrate the effects of reductions in nutrient inputs. Phosphorus concentrations in this period increased in other parts of the Baltic Sea, because of phosphorus release from sediment under anoxic conditions (HELCOM 2018). \u000a In the Greater North Sea, nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations decreased between 1990 and 2017 at a large number of stations in transitional and coastal waters, with the exception of total phosphorous concentrations in parts of the Kattegat. Again, these trends reflect the effect of reductions in nutrient inputs (OSPAR 2017). \u000a In the Celtic Seas, some offshore stations showed decreasing nutrient concentrations between 1990 and 2017. \u000a In the Black Sea, time series of phosphorus concentrations showed significant decreases in the northwest shelf area, while nitrogen concentrations showed a more variable pattern. \u000a \u000a orthophosphate total phosphorus csi winter orthophosphate concentrations european seas nutrients nitrogen marine regions ammonium nitrite nitrate trends marine and coastal concentrations dissolved inorganic concentrations trend total nitrogen concentration total phosphorus concentration mean CSI CSI021 MAR MAR005 021 005 p1170 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1171 (dp1172 g19 Ven p1173 sg20 Nsg11 VMeasures to reduce the adverse effects of excess anthropogenic inputs of nutrients and to protect the marine environment are being taken as a result of various initiatives at global, European, regional (i.e. through Regional Sea Conventions and/or regional Ministerial Conferences) and national levels.
\u000aThere are a number of EU Directives aimed at reducing the loads and impacts of nutrients, including the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) aimed at the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources; the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC) aimed at reducing pollution from sewage treatment works and from certain industries; the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (96/61/EEC) aimed at controlling and preventing pollution of water from industry; the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), which requires the achievement of good ecological status or good ecological potential of transitional and coastal waters across the EU by 2015 and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC), which requires the achievement or maintenance of good environmental status in European seas by 2020 at the latest. The MSFD requires the adoption of national marine strategies based on 11 qualitative descriptors, one of which is Descriptor 5: Eutrophication.
\u000aMeasures also arise from international initiatives and policies including: the UN Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine environment against Land-Based Activities; the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) 1975; the Helsinki Convention 1992 (HELCOM); the OSPAR Convention 1998; and the Black Sea Environmental Programme (BSEP). Reduction of nutrient sources is included as one of the targets under Sustainable Development Goal SDG 14: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.
p1174 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1175 (dp1176 g19 Ven p1177 sg20 Nsg11 VThe most pertinent target with regard to concentrations of nutrients in water arises from the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, where one of the environmental objectives is to achieve good ecological status. Member States have defined water-type specific environmental standards to support the achievement of good ecological status.
\u000aAs natural and background concentrations of nutrients vary between and within the subregional seas, nutrient targets or thresholds for achieving good ecological status have to be determined while taking into account local conditions.
\u000aWithin the scope of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, nutrient levels (nutrient concentrations in the water column for total and dissolved inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus) are the relevant primary criteria (D5C1) in marine waters under Descriptor 5: Human-induced eutrophication. The assessment of eutrophication in marine waters needs to combine information on nutrient levels as well as a range of ecologically relevant primary effects and secondary effects, taking into account relevant temporal scales. The nutrient targets and thresholds for achieving good environmental status are determined by Member States.
\u000aOther targets related to nutrient pollution are:
\u000aMAP/Mediterranean Sea: 50 % reduction in nutrient discharges from industrial sources.
p1178 sbtp1179 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1180 (dp1181 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/chlorophyll-in-transitional-coastal-and-3 p1182 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1183 (dp1184 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/chlorophyll-in-transitional-coastal-and-3/assessment p1185 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1186 (dp1187 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI023 | MAR006 p1188 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1189 (dp1190 g19 Ven p1191 sg20 Nsg11 VChlorophyll in transitional, coastal and marine waters p1192 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1193 (dp1194 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs eutrophication in European transitional, coastal and marine waters decreasing? p1195 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1196 (dp1197 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Chlorophyll in transitional, coastal and marine waters \u000a The trends in chlorophyll concentrations show improvements in the eutrophication status in some of Europe\u2019s seas, due to the successful implementation of nutrient management strategies. \u000a The highest chlorophyll concentrations are generally observed in transitional and coastal waters of the marine (sub)regions, in response to elevated nutrient concentrations in those waters. \u000a Decreasing chlorophyll concentrations were observed in the southwestern Baltic Sea and along the continental coast of the Greater North Sea (including Kattegat), showing the effects of measures to reduce nutrient inputs (OSPAR 2017, HELCOM 2018). \u000a For the other marine (sub)regions, only a few time series were available. In general, those time series did not show significant trends. \u000a chlorophyll-a marine and coastal CSI CSI023 MAR MAR006 023 006 p1198 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1199 (dp1200 g19 Ven p1201 sg20 Nsg11 VThere are a number of EU Directives aimed at reducing the loads and impacts of nutrients. These include the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC), aimed at reducing nitrate pollution from agricultural sources; the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC), aimed at reducing pollution from sewage treatment works and certain industries; and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (96/61/EEC), aimed at controlling and preventing pollution of water from industry. Other directives includes the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), which requires the achievement of good ecological status or good ecological potential of transitional and coastal waters across the EU by 2015 and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC), which requires the achievement or maintenance of good environmental status in European sea basins by 2020 at the latest, through the adoption of national marine strategies based on 11 qualitative descriptors, one of which is Descriptor 5: Eutrophication.
\u000aMeasures also arise from a number of other international initiatives and policies including the UN Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine environment against Land-based Activities; the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) 1975; the Helsinki Convention 1992 (HELCOM) on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area; the OSPAR Convention 1998 for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic; and the Black Sea Environmental Programme (BSEP). Reduction of nutrient sources is included as one of the targets under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.
\u000a.
p1202 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1203 (dp1204 g19 Ven p1205 sg20 Nsg11 VNatural and background concentrations of chlorophyll vary between and within subregional seas, depending on physical and biological factors, such as natural background nutrient loads, water residence time, mixing, light conditions and biological processes.
\u000aThe most pertinent target with regard to chlorophyll concentrations arises from the Water Framework Directive. Target chlorophyll concentrations/ranges that support the biological quality elements at a good status (high-good boundary and good-moderate boundary) have been defined in the Commission Decision (2018/229) based on the results of the intercalibration exercise carried out by the geographical intercalibration groups in the Baltic Sea, the North-East Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea. These target chlorophyll concentrations/ranges are determined locally for different water types and water categories, including coastal and transitional water bodies.
\u000aChlorophyll concentration in the water column is considered as one of the primary criteria (D5C2) of the direct effect of nutrient enrichment in marine waters under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive\u2019s Good Environmental Status Descriptor 5: Human-Induced Eutrophication. The assessment of eutrophication in marine waters needs to take into account the assessment of coastal and transitional waters under the Water Framework Directive in a way that ensures comparability, taking into consideration the information and knowledge gathered and approaches developed in the framework of regional sea conventions. Chlorophyll targets or thresholds for achieving good environmental status in marine waters are defined by Member States.
p1206 sbtp1207 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1208 (dp1209 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fishing-fleet-capacity-2 p1210 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1211 (dp1212 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fishing-fleet-capacity-2/assessment p1213 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1214 (dp1215 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI034 | MAR009 p1216 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1217 (dp1218 g19 Ven p1219 sg20 Nsg11 VFishing fleet pressure p1220 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1221 (dp1222 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs fishing pressure in European seas decreasing? p1223 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1224 (dp1225 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Fishing fleet pressure The EU fishing fleet displays strong regional differences in terms of its composition, but it is mostly made up of small vessels (59%). There has been a marked decrease in fishing fleet capacity (i.e. number of vessels) between 2004 and 2001 , during which time small vessels decreased at an annual rate of approximately 1% and large vessels at 7% . \u000a Most of the EU fishing effort is deployed by large vessels (74%) with mobile gears, of which the majority (61%) disturbs the seafloor. The decrease in capacity has been followed by a decrease in the effort of large vessels only (over 7% between 2004-2011), while the effort of small vessels has increased by approximately 5%. This is reflected in an overall shift towards gear with less impact on the seafloor. \u000a The observed change of EU fishing effort and the shift towards gear with less impact is indicative of an overall decrease in fishing pressure and impact in European seas between 2004 and 2011. fisheries marine and coastal CSI CSI034 MAR MAR009 034 009 p1226 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1227 (dp1228 g19 Ven p1229 sg20 Nsg11 VEU fisheries are regulated by the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The CFP was first implemented in 1983 to ensure the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources. It brought the management of fisheries by EU Member States under one system, while defining a common approach to the organisation of the domestic markets in fish and fish products and the structural development of national fishing fleets. Since then, it has evolved incrementally, undergoing reforms every ten years. Nevertheless, the CFP kept falling short on delivering its policy objectives. By the time the 3rd reform process was initiated, in 2009, there was a broad acknowledgment of the key CFP structural failings (EC, 2009). This led to a major revision bringing forth a new policy that came into force in January 2014.
\u000aThe core objective of the new CFP is \u201cto ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable in the long-term and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies". This means ensuring two key environmental objectives, one applying to fish stocks and the other to the ecosystem impact of fisheries.
\u000aThe first of these objectives is that the populations of fish stocks be progressively restored and maintained above biomass levels that can produce the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), while applying the precautionary approach. This sustainable biomass objective has been further translated into a management target, which is to ensure all fish stocks are exploited (i.e. the level of fishing pressure) at MSY rates by 2015, where possible, and by 2020 at the latest.
\u000aThe second objective is to implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. This requires a fundamental shift in the priorities of fisheries management and the knowledge underpinning it, where the aim is no longer to maximise the catch of single fish stocks but to minimise the impacts of fishing activities (including aquaculture) on the marine ecosystem.
\u000aThe new CFP (2014) comes into a new environmental policy context with the entry into force of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) in 2008 (EC, 2008). By adopting the ecosystem approach, the main MSFD objective is to reach or maintain Good Environmental Status (GES) of EU seas by 2020. The state of commercial fish stocks and the pressure and impacts of fisheries in the wider ecosystem (Descriptors 1, 3, 4 and 6) are recognised as key components of GES. In particular for fish stocks, GES is further described (Descriptor 3) as a level of exploitation that is at or below MSY, a reproductive capacity kept intact (meaning equal or greater than MSY), and a population age and size distribution indicative of a healthy stock. The MSFD objective of reaching GES by 2020 is thus intimately linked with the CFP objectives and coherence needs to be ensured, as further recognised in the CFP.
p1230 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1231 (dp1232 g19 Ven p1233 sg20 Nsg11 VThe new CFP (2014) environmental objectives and targets are:
\u000a\u000a
The overall MSFD (2008) objective is to reach Good Environmental Status (GES) of the marine environment by 2020. For its descriptor D3 on commercial fish stocks, this means "Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock". Concretely this means:
\u000aOne of the symbols of the linear economy system, which predominated in recent decades, is the high consumption of resources followed by high waste generation ('take-make-dispose'). This economic model is based on increasing profits generated by the consumption of primary resources and increasing demand for short-cycle products. In 2015 and 2018, the European Commission adopted Circular Economy packages to make the transition to a stronger economic model where resources are used in a more sustainable way. The waste hierarchy serves to set priorities for national waste policies and gives the highest priority to waste prevention, followed by preparing for reuse, recycling, other methods of recovery and disposal. These priorities are highlighted by recent waste and resource efficiency policies and strategies at EU and national levels.
\u000aAlthough the importance of waste prevention has been recognised in European waste legislation since its first 1975 Directive on Waste (75/442/EEC), effective waste prevention measures in the Member States have been lacking. Waste prevention was especially underlined in the subsequent Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). Article 4 of the Directive requires that waste prevention measures should be considered a top priority when developing waste policy and Annex IV contains examples of measures connected with waste prevention. According to the Waste Framework Directive, all EU member states had to adopt Waste Prevention Programmes by 12 December 2013. These programmes are focused on a variety of sectors and waste types. According to Articles 29 and 30 (2008/98/EC), the Waste Prevention Programmes must be evaluated at least every sixth year.
\u000aWaste prevention and using waste as a resource are becoming more and more important, not only in environmental policies, but also in industrial and raw material policies, and as a backbone of the transition to a green economy. In 2011, the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM (2011) 571) set the objective that waste generation per person should be in absolute decline by 2020. Two years later, the EU\u2019s 7th Environment Action Programme called for additional efforts to reduce waste generation both per person and in absolute terms.
\u000aIn 2015 the European Commission adopted a Circular Economy Package, which included legislative proposals on waste\u202fto stimulate Europe's transition towards a circular economy. The Circular Economy Package consists of an\u202fEU Action Plan for the Circular Economy\u202fthat establishes a concrete programme of action, with\u202fmeasures covering the whole cycle: from production and consumption to waste management and the market for secondary raw materials. The\u202fannex to the action plan\u202fsets out the timeline when the actions will be completed. The proposed actions should contribute to\u202f'closing the loop' of product life cycles through greater recycling and\u202freuse, and should bring benefits for both the environment and the economy.
\u000aMost recently, the European Commission\u2019s 2018 Circular economy package sets out measures related to prevention of plastic waste, and the revised Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EU as amended by Directive 2018/851/EU) strengthens the provisions on waste prevention but does not include quantified targets for waste in general.
\u000a\u000a
Overall, waste generation reduction and increasing waste prevention are dominant interests also at the global level. In 2015, The United Nations member states adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Goal 12 includes several targets supporting 'ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns' and sets the target to 'substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse' by 2030 (12.5).
\u000ap1258 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1259 (dp1260 g19 Ven p1261 sg20 Nsg11 V
No quantitative waste prevention targets are established for waste in general. Some limited targets apply to selected waste streams, including food waste (Waste Framework Directive) and plastic bags (Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive). However, the EU\u2019s 7th Environment Action Programme sets the objective of reducing waste generation both per person and in absolute terms, and UN's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development sets out to reduce the amount of generated waste through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse. Nevertheless, the Sustainable Development Goals are not legally binding.
\u000ap1262 sbtp1263 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1264 (dp1265 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/renewable-gross-final-energy-consumption-4 p1266 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1267 (dp1268 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/renewable-gross-final-energy-consumption-4/assessment-4 p1269 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1270 (dp1271 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI048 | ENER028 p1272 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1273 (dp1274 g19 Ven p1275 sg20 Nsg11 VShare of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption in Europe p1276 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1277 (dp1278 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHas the consumption of renewable electricity, renewable energy for heating and cooling, and renewable energy for transport increased in EEA countries? | What progress has been made towards the EU\u2019s 20 % renewable energy consumption target for 2020? p1279 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1280 (dp1281 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-4 Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption in Europe \u000a The share of renewable energy in gross final energy use in the EU has doubled since 2005. It reached 17.6 % in 2017 and increased further to 18.0 % in 2018, according to the early estimates from the European Environment Agency (EEA). \u000a The increase in the share of renewable energy sources in final energy consumption has slowed down in recent years. Increasing energy consumption and lack of progress in the transport sector compromise the chances of achieving both 2020 targets on renewable energy and energy efficiency at EU level. \u000a In 2018, according to the EEA's early estimates: \u000a \u000a progress towards national targets improved across the EU, with 24 Member States (all but France, Ireland, the Netherlands and Poland) meeting or exceeding their indicative targets set under the Renewable Energy Directive, compared with 21 Member States on target in 2017. In addition, 16 Member States (all except Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain) reached or exceeded the trajectories set in their own National Renewable Energy Action Plans, the same as in 2017; \u000a 12 countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Sweden) had already managed to achieve their binding renewable energy share targets for 2020, as set under the Renewable Energy Directive; \u000a renewable energy accounted for 30.7 % of gross final electricity consumption, 19.5 % of energy consumption for heating and cooling, and 7.6 % of transport fuel consumption in the whole EU. \u000a \u000a \u000a renewable energy energy energy consumption red res CSI CSI048 ENER ENER028 048 028 p1282 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1283 (dp1284 g19 Ven p1285 sg20 Nsg11 V
Environmental context
\u000aThe share of RES consumption provides a broad indication of progress towards reducing the impact of energy consumption on the environment, since energy from renewable sources generally has a lower environmental impact per energy unit on a life-cycle basis, than energy sourced from fossil fuels. Increasing the share of renewables in energy consumption will help the EU to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power generation, but the overall impact will depend on the interactions between RES support frameworks and other policy frameworks, especially the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) Directive (2009/29/EC) that establishes a scheme to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-efficient way.
\u000aFor example, it may be assumed that the development of RES prevents greenhouse gas emissions and, to some extent, reduces primary energy production (because certain renewables are assumed to have a 100 % transformation efficiency, which statistically improves the overall conversion efficiency of the system). This helps meet not only the greenhouse gas target, but also the energy efficiency target. The RED may also compensate, to a certain extent, for the impact of low EU allowance prices in the EU ETS by requiring Member States to increase their share of RES via the introduction of RES-E support schemes at national level. In some cases, the introduction of feed-in tariffs in particular has helped support the innovation of less mature technologies. In certain cases, however, the overlap of policy instruments might also have less positive effects. For instance, although the ETS cap was set in a way that accounted for the expected greenhouse gas reduction effects induced by the binding RES targets until 2020, the overlap between establishing emissions caps under the ETS and setting RES targets introduces an element of uncertainty. Achieving an RES share in gross final energy consumption that is higher than the indicative RED target for a given period may result in additional gross avoided emissions [1]. These, for the most part, take place in the EU ETS, where they may free up more ETS allowances than initially anticipated [2] and further affect the carbon price signal in the EU ETS.
\u000aEmissions of air pollutants are also generally lower for RES-E production than for electricity produced from fossil fuels. The exception to this is the incineration of municipal and solid waste (which, because of the high cost of separation, usually involves the combustion of some mixed wastes including materials contaminated with heavy metals) and the combustion of biomass feedstock in inefficient appliances (such as certain household boilers). Emissions to the atmosphere from the incineration of municipal solid waste (MSW) are subject to stringent regulations including tight controls on emissions of cadmium, mercury and other such substances.
\u000aAs with all energy resources, the exploitation of RES may also have negative impacts on landscapes, habitats and ecosystems, though many impacts can be minimised through careful site selection. Some types of biomass and biofuel crops have considerable land, water and agricultural input requirements such as fertilisers and pesticides. Hydropower schemes can have adverse effects including flooding, disruption of ecosystems and hydrology, and socio-economic impacts if resettlement is required (for large hydropower schemes). Some solar PV schemes require relatively large quantities of heavy metals in their construction, and geothermal energy can release pollutant gases carried by hot fluids if not properly controlled. Wind turbines can have visual and noise impacts in the areas in which they are sited. On the other hand, offshore wind farms can have a positive impact on the marine environment. They can provide regeneration areas for fish and benthic populations. This can be explained not only by reduced trawling activities, but also because offshore wind farm foundations function as an artificial reef, encouraging the creation of new habitats [3].
\u000a[1] Gross avoided greenhouse gas emissions in the EU result from the substitution by renewable energy of more greenhouse-gas-intensive forms of energy production in the energy mix.
\u000a[2] Emission reductions achieved through RES-E schemes are often associated with abatement costs above the ETS price and, therefore, may affect the static efficiency of the policy instrument mix.
\u000a[3] European Wind Energy Association, 2012, Positive environmental impacts of offshore wind farms (www.ewea.org).
\u000aPolicy targets for 2020
\u000aThe RED commits the EU to reaching a 20 % share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption by 2020 and a 10 % share of renewable energy consumed in transport by the same year. It sets binding national targets for renewable energy consumption by 2020 and requires Member States to adopt and publish NREAPs [1] that outline how each country plans to reach its legally binding 2020 renewable energy target. The directive also provides options for cooperation to help countries achieve their targets cost effectively, and puts forward a set of sustainability criteria for biofuels.
\u000aIf all national commitments adopted by countries in the 2010 NREAPs are fulfilled, the EU should slightly overachieve its 2020 RED target. According to the NREAP commitments, the share of RES consumption at the EU level should increase more quickly from 2013 to 2018 than in the indicative trajectory set in the RED.
\u000aAn analysis [2] of the EU-28 countries' NREAPs shows that renewable energy output is projected to grow by 6 % per year on average. Wind power, solar electricity and biofuels are foreseen to have the highest growth rates. If all Member States follow the trajectory outlined in their plans, the EU will exceed its 20 % renewable energy target by 1 percentage point.
\u000aFurther growth to achieve the 20 % target will depend on the further fine-tuning of existing policy frameworks, improved market conditions for grid access to renewable sources and the full implementation of a guarantee of origin system to allow further development of the renewable consumer market. In addition, better and more integrated planning will be required to ensure not only a high efficiency of investment and an accelerated pace of development, but also that the penetration of these sources takes place in a manner that would minimise the environmental impact within and outside the EU.
\u000a[1] NREAPs were submitted by 30 June 2010 and thereafter national progress reports have been submitted.
\u000a[2] Based on an analysis of NREAPs by the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) (ECN, 2011, Renewable energy projections as published in the National Renewable Energy Action Plans of the European Member States \u2014 Covering all 27 EU Member States, available at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/national-renewable-energy-action-plan/nreap_draft_report_eea-ecn_20100830.pdf).
\u000aUse of flexible mechanisms as provided by the Renewable Energy Directive
\u000aFlexible and cooperative measures to help countries achieve their renewable energy targets in a cost-effective manner and without undermining market stability are foreseen in the RED [1]: statistical transfers, joint projects and joint support schemes. In addition, Member States can also import RES-E from third countries outside the EU ('joint projects between Member States and third countries').
\u000a- Member States may agree on the statistical transfer of a specified amount of renewable energy between themselves. Renewable energy is thus virtually transferred to the statistics of another Member State, counting towards the national RES target of the latter Member State.
\u000a- Joint projects are RES-E or -H&C projects between two or several Member States; one Member State may provide financial support for a RES project in another country and count (part of) the project\u2019s energy production towards its own target. Member States can also cooperate on any type of joint project relating to the production of renewable energy, involving private operators if they like.
\u000a- In the case of joint support schemes, two or more Member States may decide, on a voluntary basis, to join or partly coordinate their national support schemes in order to help achieve their targets. In such cases, a certain amount of energy from renewable sources produced in the territory of one participating Member State may count towards the national overall target of another participating Member State.
\u000aAccording to the Member States' forecasts in their NREAPs, a number of countries are projected to have a surplus in 2020, compared with their binding target. This surplus could be available to transfer to a Member State that falls short of its target, through the use of the directive's cooperation mechanisms.
\u000a[1] The directive uses the term 'cooperation mechanisms' instead of 'flexibility mechanisms' in order to distinguish these mechanisms from the Kyoto flexible mechanisms.
\u000aA range of EU, regional and national legislation has been implemented in Europe to address the use of chemicals and their emission to the environment, including to fresh and marine waters:
\u000aComplementing these efforts are the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, which are multilateral environmental agreements that have the common objective of protecting human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes.
p1314 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1315 (dp1316 g19 Ven p1317 sg20 Nsg11 VThe aim of the WFD was to achieve zero, near-zero or background contaminant concentrations (more specifically defined in a daughter directive on environmental quality standards, i.e. the EQSD, 2008/105/EC), depending on the contaminant. This was to be achieved through abatement actions in relation to emmissions, with the objective of reaching good ecological and chemical status by 2015 for fresh, transitional and coastal waters. Goals similar to those of the WFD have also been outlined by OSPAR and the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helcom). For the Mediterranean Sea, similar targets have been adopted. The reduction and phasing-out targets were formulated in accordance with related regional and international conventions and programmes, such as EU directives, policies and strategies, and the Stockholm and Basel Conventions. However, similar targets have yet to be formulated for the Black Sea, although discussions are under way.
\u000aWithin the scope of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, hazardous substances are the relevant criteria and indicators in marine waters under Descriptor 8 ('Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects') and Descriptor 9 ('Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established by Community legislation or other relevant standards'). In this regard, Member States are required to take into account relevant existing environmental targets, including the EQSs set out in the EQSD. Therefore, this directive applies to waters covered by both the WFD and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, i.e. the seaward side of the baseline to the extent of territorial waters. A process is under way to define standards for the hazardous substances listed in biota, with a view to applying these to the marine and coastal environments.
p1318 sbtp1319 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1320 (dp1321 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/abundance-and-distribution-of-selected-species-8 p1322 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1323 (dp1324 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/abundance-and-distribution-of-selected-species-8/assessment-1 p1325 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1326 (dp1327 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI050 | SEBI001 p1328 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1329 (dp1330 g19 Ven p1331 sg20 Nsg11 VAbundance and distribution of selected European species p1332 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1333 (dp1334 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1335 (dp1336 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Abundance and distribution of selected European species Long-term monitoring schemes show significant downward trends in common farmland birds and in grassland butterfly population numbers, with no signs of recovery. \u000a Between 1990 and 2017, there was an 8 % decline in the index of 168 common bird species in the 25 EU Member States with bird population monitoring schemes and the United Kingdom (UK). The common forest bird index showed no decrease over the same period. The decreases were slightly greater if figures for Norway and Switzerland are included: 11 % for all common birds and 2 % for forest birds. \u000a The decline in common farmland bird numbers between 1990 and 2017 was much more pronounced, at 33 % (EU Member States and UK) and 35 % (if Norway and Switzerland are included). \u000a The index of grassland butterflies has declined strongly in the 15 EU countries where butterfly monitoring schemes exist. In 2017, the index was 39 % below its 1990 value. all common birds grassland butterflies population trends common forest birds common farmland birds SEBI SEBI001 CSI CSI050 001 050 p1337 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1338 (dp1339 g19 Ven p1340 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU has taken action on the protection of biodiversity for a considerable number of years, for example, by adopting the Birds Directive \u2014 0409/1979 (updated in 2009/147/EC) and the Habitats Directive \u2014 0043/1992.
\u000aAlready in 2011, the first EU biodiversity strategy, Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020, was adopted by the European Commission in line with the results of the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), held in Nagoya, Japan (October 2010). This provided a framework for the EU to meet its own biodiversity objectives and global commitments as a party to the CBD. The strategy, built around six mutually supportive targets that adress the main drivers of biodiversity loss, aimed to reduce the key pressures on nature and ecosystem services in the EU, but failed to reach its targets.
\u000aThe publication of the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives in May 2020 reinforces the relevance of this indicator, in particular through the commitments of the EU Nature Restoration Plan.
\u000aMoreover, this indicator needs to be seen in the context of the CAP, in particular its rural development policy 2014-2020, as well as the new Farm to Fork strategy. Relevant policy measures under the rural development policy include agri-environment-climate schemes and payments to farmers in areas with natural constraints or for adapted farming in areas with environmental restrictions, such as Natura 2000 sites.
p1341 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1342 (dp1343 g19 Ven p1344 sg20 Nsg11 VEU 2020 Biodiversity Headline Target
p1345 sbtp1346 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1347 (dp1348 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exposure-to-and-annoyance-by-2 p1349 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1350 (dp1351 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exposure-to-and-annoyance-by-2/assessment-4 p1352 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1353 (dp1354 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI051 | TERM005 p1355 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1356 (dp1357 g19 Ven p1358 sg20 Nsg11 VExposure of Europe's population to environmental noise p1359 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1360 (dp1361 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the extent of noise pollution in Europe? p1362 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1363 (dp1364 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-4 Exposure of Europe's population to environmental noise \u000a Noise pollution is a major environmental health problem in Europe. \u000a Road traffic is the most widespread source of environmental noise, with more than 100 million people affected by harmful levels in the EEA-33 member countries. Railways, air traffic and industry are also major sources of noise. \u000a The European Union's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) sets the objective that by 2020 noise pollution in the EU will have significantly decreased, moving closer to World Health Organization (WHO) recommended levels. \u000a noise TERM TERM005 CSI CSI051 005 051 p1365 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1366 (dp1367 g19 Ven p1368 sg20 Nsg11 VThe END is the main EU instrument through which noise emissions are monitored and actions developed. It defines environmental noise as 'unwanted or harmful outdoor sound created by human activities, including noise emitted by means of transport, road traffic, rail traffic, air traffic and from sites of industrial activity'. It places an obligation on EU Member States to assess noise levels by producing strategic noise maps for all major roads, railways, airports and urban areas. Based on these noise-mapping results, Member States must prepare action plans containing measures that address noise issues and their effects for those areas where the specific END indicators (i.e. 55 dB averaged across the day, evening and night periods (Lden) and 50 dB averaged across the night period (Lnight)) have been exceeded. The END neither sets limit values for noise exposure, nor prescribes measures for inclusion in the action plans. Finally, Member States are required to select and preserve areas of good acoustic environmental quality, referred to as quiet areas, in order to protect the European soundscape.
\u000aHigh noise levels are defined in the 7th EAP as noise levels for Lden above 55 dB and for Lnight above 50 dB. During the night, environmental noise starting at Lnight levels below 40 dB can cause negative effects on sleep to occur such as body movements, awakenings, self-reported sleep disturbance and, in addition, effects on the cardiovascular system that become apparent above 55 dB. All these impacts can contribute to a range of health outcomes, including premature mortality. The WHO has set a Night Noise Guideline level for Europe at 40 dB Lnight.
p1369 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1370 (dp1371 g19 Ven p1372 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU's current 7th EAP contains the objective that by 2020 noise pollution in the EU will have significantly decreased, moving closer to WHO recommended levels. In order to achieve this objective, an updated EU noise policy aligned with the latest scientific knowledge must be implemented along with measures to reduce noise at source, including improvements in city design.Â
p1373 sbtp1374 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1375 (dp1376 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/mobility-and-urbanisation-pressure-on-ecosystems-2 p1377 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1378 (dp1379 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/mobility-and-urbanisation-pressure-on-ecosystems-2/assessment p1380 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1381 (dp1382 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI054 | LSI004 p1383 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1384 (dp1385 g19 Ven p1386 sg20 Nsg11 VLandscape fragmentation pressure and trends in Europe p1387 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1388 (dp1389 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VFragmentation status and trends 2009-2015: European Union overview | Fragmentation status and trends 2009-2015: country comparison | Lands affected by fragmentation during 2009-2015 in the European Union p1390 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1391 (dp1392 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Landscape fragmentation pressure and trends in Europe In 2015, on average, there were around 1.5 fragmented landscape elements per km 2 in the European Union [1] , a 3.7 % increase compared with 2009. \u000a Approximately 1.13 million km 2 , around 28 % of the area of the EU [1] , was strongly fragmented i n 2015 , a 0.7 % increase compared with 2009. \u000a There was less of an increase in fragmented landscape elements and in the area of strongly fragmented landscape between 2012 and 2015 than between 2009 and 2012 (1.4 and 0.18 percentage points, respectively). \u000a Arable lands and permanent croplands (around 42 .6 %) and pastures and farmland mosaics (around 40.2 %) were most affected by strong fragmentation pressure in 2015 in the EU. Between 2009 and 2015, however, the largest increase in the area of strongly fragmented landscape was in grasslands/pastures and in farmland mosaics. \u000a Luxembourg (91 %), Belgium (83 %) and Malta (70 %) had the largest proportions of strongly fragmented landscape in 2015 (as a proportion of their country area). The Baltic countries and Finland and Sweden were on average the least fragmented countries in the EU. \u000a Between 2009 and 2015, the area of strongly fragmented landscape increased most in Croatia, as well as in Greece, Hungary and Poland. \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a [1] Romania is excluded because of the poor coverage of fragmentation geometry data in 2009. \u000a \u000a \u000a land cover land use fragmentation LSI LSI004 CSI CSI054 004 054 p1393 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1394 (dp1395 g19 Ven p1396 sg20 Nsg11 VPriority objective 1, paragraph 23, of the Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) explicitly lists fragmentation as one of the key elements necessary to protect, conserve and enhance the Union\u2019s natural capital: 'The degradation, fragmentation and unsustainable use of land in the Union is jeopardising the provision of several key ecosystem services, threatening biodiversity and increasing Europe\u2019s vulnerability to climate change and natural disasters. It is also exacerbating soil degradation and desertification.'
\u000aFurthermore, priority objective 7 ('To improve environmental integration and policy coherence'), paragraph 87, offers ample space for fragmentation to play a role in the more effective integration of environmental and climate-related considerations into other policies: 'Incorporation of the green infrastructure can also help to overcome the fragmentation of habitats, preserve and restore ecological connectivity, enhance ecosystem resilience and thereby ensure the continued provision of ecosystem services, including carbon sequestration, and climate adaptation, while providing healthier environments and recreational spaces for people to enjoy.'
\u000aThe EU 2020 biodiversity strategy, specifically target 2, indirectly addresses the fragmentation of ecosystems and habitats, as it requires that 'by 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15 % of degraded ecosystems'.
\u000aReducing fragmentation will also contribute to achieving all other targets of the EU biodiversity strategy, such as target 1 concerning the full implementation of the Birds and the Habitats Directives. In particular, paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Habitats Directive sets up the legal framework for the Natura 2000 network, and paragraph 3 states that 'Where they consider it necessary, Member States shall endeavour to improve the ecological coherence of Natura 2000 by maintaining, and where appropriate developing, features of the landscape which are of major importance for wild fauna and flora, as referred to in Article 10.'
\u000aIn addition, Article 6.4 of the Habitats Directive stipulates that Member States are to take 'all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of the Natura 2000 network is protected'. Article 10 of the Habitats Directive and Article 3 of the Birds Directive also include more general connectivity provisions that relate to land use planning and development policies. Work on the fragmentation of ecosystems and habitats will also contribute to achieving targets 3 and 4 of the EU 2020 biodiversity strategy concerning maintaining and enhancing biodiversity in the wider countryside (and the marine environment).
\u000a[1] EEA, 2014, Fragmentation: Overview of the knowledge base in the field of habitat and landscape fragmentation.
p1397 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1398 (dp1399 g19 Ven p1400 sg20 Nsg11 VNone of the existing EU policies sets quantitative targets for reducing and/or measuring the harmful impacts of the fragmentation of ecosystems. The EU 2020 biodiversity strategy, specifically target 2, directly addresses the fragmentation of ecosystems and habitats, as it requires that 'by 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15 % of degraded ecosystems'.
\u000aCombating fragmentation will contribute to achieving all other targets of the EU biodiversity strategy as well, such as target 1 concerning the full implementation of the Birds and the Habitats Directives. In particular, paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Habitats Directive sets up the legal framework for the Natura 2000 network, whereas paragraph 3 states that 'Where they consider it necessary, Member States shall endeavour to improve the ecological coherence of Natura 2000 by maintaining, and where appropriate developing, features of the landscape which are of major importance for wild fauna and flora, as referred to in Article 10.'
\u000aIn addition, Article 6.4 stipulates that Member States are to take 'all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected'. Article 10 of the Habitats Directive and Article 3 of the Birds Directive also include more general connectivity provisions that relate to land use planning and development policies. Work on the fragmentation of ecosystems and habitats will also contribute to achieving targets 3 and 4 of the EU 2020 biodiversity strategy concerning maintaining and enhancing biodiversity in the wider countryside and the marine environment.
p1401 sbtp1402 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1403 (dp1404 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/industrial-pollution-in-europe-3 p1405 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1406 (dp1407 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/industrial-pollution-in-europe-3/assessment p1408 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1409 (dp1410 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI055 | INDP003 p1411 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1412 (dp1413 g19 Ven p1414 sg20 Nsg11 VIndustrial pollution in Europe p1415 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1416 (dp1417 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow does industry affect the European environment? | Is there a link between soil contamination and industrial activity? | What are the trends in releases to air from industry? | What are the trends in releases to water from industry? | What are the trends in waste generation from industry? p1418 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1419 (dp1420 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Industrial pollution in Europe \u000a Industry is still a significant source of pollutant releases to Europe\u2019s environment. \u000a Releases of pollutants to air and water by European industry have generally decreased during the last decade. \u000a Environmental regulation and improved pollutant abatement technology, among other factors, have led to decreasing pollutant releases to air and water in Europe. \u000a Soil contamination in Europe is, among other things, linked to industrial activity. \u000a Waste transfers from industrial facilities in the EU have remained relatively stable in the last decade. \u000a \u000a waste transfers industry air emissions water emissions CSI CSI055 INDP INDP003 055 003 p1421 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1422 (dp1423 g19 Ven p1424 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU Industrial Policy Strategy was mentioned above already. It covers a plethora of topics ranging from cyber security to sustainable finance but, importantly, also includes goals for a low-carbon and circular economy.
\u000aAccordingly, the aim of the EU policy is to reduce emissions to air, water and land, including measures related to waste, in order to achieve a high level of protection of the environment as a whole.
\u000aThe Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) (EC, 2010) is a key regulatory instrument with which the EU is achieving emission reductions in the industrial sector. It superseded the Industrial Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPCD) by harmonising it with a number of other related regulations and directives such as the Large Combustion Plant Directive (LCPD).
\u000aThe IED:
\u000aAccording to the IED, around 50 000 industrial installations are required to operate under a permit (which itself is granted by authorities at the Member State level). Importantly, in the context of this indicator, permit conditions including emission limit values must be based on BATs. BAT refers to the most effective, and economically and technically viable methods of operation that reduce emissions and the impact on the environment.
\u000aTo define BAT, the European Commission organises an exchange of information between Member State experts, industry and environmental organisations. This process results in the production of BAT reference documents (BREFs). Each BREF contains information on the techniques and processes used in a specific industrial sector in the EU, current emission and fuel consumption trends, and techniques to consider for the determination of BATs, as well as emerging techniques. The conclusions on BAT, for each BREF, are subsequently adopted as a legal act so that they are legally binding for the granting of permits.
\u000aAn up-to-date list of BREFs and associated binding BAT conclusions containing the emission limit values for a host of different industrial activities can be found on the website of the Joint Research Centre .
\u000aNext to the IED, which is very much a regulation attempting to control pollution at source, there are a number of additional pieces of environmental legislation at the European level that address industrial activities including those setting overall emission limits, those requiring reporting of emissions and waste generated, and those stipulating better environmental quality:
\u000aNo target is specified.
p1429 sbtp1430 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1431 (dp1432 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/passenger-and-freight-transport-demand p1433 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1434 (dp1435 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/passenger-and-freight-transport-demand/assessment-1 p1436 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1437 (dp1438 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VCSI056 | TERM039 p1439 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1440 (dp1441 g19 Ven p1442 sg20 Nsg11 VPassenger and freight transport demand in Europe p1443 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1444 (dp1445 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs public transport increasing as a proportion of total passenger transport? | Is road freight being reduced relative to other transport modes? | Is transport demand being decoupled from economic growth in Europe? p1446 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1447 (dp1448 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Passenger and freight transport demand in Europe \u000a Passenger transport demand in the EU-28 increased by 2 % between 2016 and 2017 to reach a new all-time high, which was 30 % higher than in 1995. \u000a Car passenger travel remains the dominant transport mode, accounting for just over 70 % of total passenger transport. \u000a Air transport continues to grow and now boasts a modal share of passenger transport of 11 % \u2014 a higher share than in all previous years. Compared with 2016, air transport grew by 9 % in 2017. \u000a Rail passenger travel is stable, accounting for 7 % of transport demand in 2017. \u000a In 2017, the main contributors to the increase in total freight transport were road and rail freight (+4.7 % and 2.2 %, respectively). Total freight transport increased by 2.4 % compared with 2016. \u000a The modal share of freight transported over land remained largely constant and is still dominated by road transport (73 %), followed by rail (17 %) and inland waterways (6 %). \u000a passenger transport freight transport transport demand CSI CSI056 TERM TERM039 056 039 p1449 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1450 (dp1451 g19 Ven p1452 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU has set itself the objective of decoupling economic growth from transport demand in order to create a more sustainable transport system. This decoupling has been a central theme in EU transport policy and is intended to minimise the negative impacts of transport.
p1453 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1454 (dp1455 g19 Ven p1456 sg20 Nsg11 VThe new EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 contains specific commitments and actions to be delivered by 2030. One of its main instruments is an EU Nature Restoration Plan, with several aims, including strengthening the EU legal framework for nature restoration and requesting Member States to ensure no deterioration in the conservation trends and status of all protected habitats and species by 2030.
\u000aThe 233 protected habitats, as well as over 1 000 species, are targeted by designating Sites of Community Importance, which are a part of the Natura 2000 network. For more information about the Natura 2000 network see SEBI 008 indicator: Natura 2000 sites designated under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives.
p1480 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1481 (dp1482 g19 Ven p1483 sg20 Nsg11 VEU Biodiversity strategy for 2030:
Key commitments of the EU Nature Restoration Plan by 2030:
1. Legally binding EU nature restoration targets to be proposed in 2021, subject to an impact assessment. By 2030, significant areas of degraded and carbon-rich ecosystems are restored; habitats and species show no deterioration in conservation trends and status; and at least 30 % reach favourable conservation status or at least show a positive trend.
2. The decline in pollinators is reversed.
3. The risk and use of chemical pesticides is reduced by 50 % and the use of more hazardous pesticides is reduced by 50 %.
4. At least 10 % of agricultural area is under high-diversity landscape features.
5. At least 25 % of agricultural land is under organic farming management, and the uptake of agro-ecological practices is significantly increased.
6. Three billion new trees are planted in the EU, in full respect of ecological principles.
7. Significant progress has been made in the remediation of contaminated soil sites.
8. At least 25,000 km of free-flowing rivers are restored.
9. There is a 50 % reduction in the number of Red List species threatened by invasive alien species.
10. The losses of nutrients from fertilisers are reduced by 50 %, resulting in the reduction of the use of fertilisers by at least 20 %.
11. Cities with at least 20,000 inhabitants have an ambitious Urban Greening Plan.
12. No chemical pesticides are used in sensitive areas such as EU urban green areas.
13. The negative impacts on sensitive species and habitats, including on the seabed through fishing and extraction activities, are substantially reduced to achieve good environmental status.
14. The by-catch of species is eliminated or reduced to a level that allows species recovery and conservation.
Directive 2012/27/EU established a set of binding measures to help the EU reach its target of decreasing energy consumption by 20 % by 2020, compared with projected levels. This was amended by Directive (EU) 2018/2002, which provides a policy framework for 2030 and beyond. This new regulatory framework includes an energy efficiency target for the EU for 2030 of a 32.5Â % reduction in energy consumption compared with projected levels, with a revision clause by 2023.
\u000aThe amending of the directive was part of the comprehensive clean energy for all Europeans package, which aims to facilitate the transition away from fossil fuels towards cleaner energy and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The package includes other relevant legislation such as Directive (EU) 2018/844 (amending directives on the energy performance of buildings and energy efficiency), the recast Renewable Energy Directive (2018/2001/EU) and the Governance Regulation (2018/199/EU).
\u000aThe composition of the energy mix and the level of consumption provide an indication of the environmental pressures associated with energy consumption. The type and magnitude of the environmental impacts associated with energy consumption, such as resource depletion, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollutant emissions, water pollution and the accumulation of radioactive waste, strongly depend on the types and amounts of fuels consumed, as well as on the abatement technologies applied.
p1507 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1508 (dp1509 g19 Ven p1510 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets has been defined for this indicator
p1511 sbtp1512 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1513 (dp1514 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/efficiency-of-conventional-thermal-electricity-generation-4 p1515 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1516 (dp1517 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/efficiency-of-conventional-thermal-electricity-generation-4/assessment-2 p1518 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1519 (dp1520 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VENER019 p1521 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1522 (dp1523 g19 Ven p1524 sg20 Nsg11 VEfficiency of conventional thermal electricity and heat production in Europe p1525 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1526 (dp1527 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs the European energy production system becoming more efficient? p1528 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1529 (dp1530 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-2 Efficiency of conventional thermal electricity and heat production in Europe \u000a Between 2005 and 2016, the efficiency of public conventional thermal power plants in the EU increased from 47 % to almost 50 %. \u000a The efficiency of electricity and heat production from autoproducer conventional thermal power plants stabilised at around 57 % in the period 2007-2016. This followed a 5 percentage point decrease in the 2 years before. \u000a electricity heat energy ENER ENER019 019 p1531 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1532 (dp1533 g19 Ven p1534 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator shows the efficiency of electricity and heat production from conventional thermal plants. A distinction is made between public conventional thermal plants (i.e. main activity producers), district heating conventional thermal plants and autoproducer conventional thermal plants. Public thermal plants mainly produce electricity (and heat) for public use. Autoproducers produce electricity (and heat) for private use, for instance in industrial processes.
\u000aThe efficiency of electricity and heat production is an important factor since losses in transformation account for a substantial part of primary energy consumption (see ENER 036). Higher production efficiency therefore results in substantial reductions in primary energy consumption, hence reducing environmental pressures as a result of avoided energy production.
\u000aHowever, the overall environmental impact of energy transformation has to be seen in the context of the type of fuel and the extent to which abatement technologies are used. Compliance with environmental legislation (for example the Large Combustion Plant Directive 2001/80/EC, the CARE package, etc.) requires the application of a series of abatement technologies (e.g. to reduce SO2 emissions requires retrofitting the plant with flue-gas desulphurisation technology, carbon capture and storage to capture CO2 emissions, etc.), increasing the energy consumption of the plant, thus reducing its efficiency. This is why it is important to promote highly efficient generation units, such as IGCC (Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle) units, which can operate at higher efficiencies.
\u000aDirective 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU, and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC: This Directive established a set of binding measures to help the EU reach its 20 % energy efficiency target by 2020. Under the Directive, all EU countries are required to use energy more efficiently at all stages of the energy chain, from production to final consumption. To reach the EU's 20 % energy efficiency target by 2020, individual EU countries have set their own indicative national energy efficiency targets. Depending on country preferences, these targets are based on primary and/or final energy consumption, primary and/or final energy savings, or energy intensity. New national measures must ensure major energy savings for consumers and industry. The European Commission published guidance notes (COM(2013) 762) to help the Member States implement the Energy Efficiency Directive.
\u000aCouncil Directive 2013/12/EU of 13 May 2013, adapting Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy efficiency, by reason of the accession of the Republic of Croatia.
\u000aCommission Guidance COM(2013) 762, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, implementing the Energy Efficiency Directive.
\u000aEarlier legislation: In 2009, the Council adopted the climate-energy legislative package, which contains measures to fight climate change and promote renewable energy. This package is designed to achieve the EU's overall environmental target of a 20 % reduction in greenhouse gases and a 20 % share of renewable energy in the EU's total energy consumption by 2020. The climate action and renewable energy (CARE) package includes the following main policy documents:
\u000a\u000a
Regulation (EC) No. 443/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council setting emission performance standards for new passenger cars as part of the community\u2019s integrated approach to reduce CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles;
\u000aCommunication from the Commission (COM(2008) 771 final): the main objectives of this communication are to report on the current status of combined heat and power generation (CHP or cogeneration) and to present possibilities for its development.
\u000aDetailed guidelines for the implementation and application of Annex II to Directive 2004/8/EC; (2008/952/EC): Guidelines for the calculation of electricity from high-efficiency co-generation.
\u000aAction Plan for Energy Efficiency, Realising the Potential (COM(2006) 545): the Commission will develop minimum binding energy efficiency requirements for electricity generation facilities, heating and cooling for facilities operating with less than 20 megawatts of power and possibly for more powerful facilities too (not published yet).
\u000aDirective on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants (Directive 2001/80/EC): this aims to control emissions of SOx, NOx and particulate matter from large (>50 MW) combustion plants and hence favours the use of higher efficiency combined cycle gas turbines as opposed to coal plants.
p1535 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1536 (dp1537 g19 Ven p1538 sg20 Nsg11 VDirective 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency establishes a common framework of measures for the promotion of energy efficiency within the European Union in order to achieve the headline target of a 20 % reduction in primary energy consumption by 2020. Member States are requested to set indicative targets. It is up to each Member State whether it bases its targets on primary energy consumption, final energy consumption, primary or final energy savings or energy intensity. Art.14 (Promotion of efficiency in heating and cooling) and Art.15 (Energy transformation, transmission and distribution) are directly relevant to the indicator.Â
p1539 sbtp1540 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1541 (dp1542 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/final-energy-consumption-intensity-5 p1543 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1544 (dp1545 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/final-energy-consumption-intensity-5/assessment p1546 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1547 (dp1548 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VENER021 p1549 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1550 (dp1551 g19 Ven p1552 sg20 Nsg11 VIntensity of final energy consumption in Europe p1553 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1554 (dp1555 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHas there been a decoupling of economic growth from final energy consumption in Europe? p1556 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1557 (dp1558 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Intensity of final energy consumption in Europe \u000a The EU's final energy intensity decreased by 18.6 % between 2005 and 2017, at a rate of 1.7 % per year. Final energy consumption decreased at a rate of 0.5 % per year, while gross domestic product grew by 1.2 % annually over the same period, on average. This indicates a decoupling of final energy consumption from economic growth in the EU. \u000a During this period, final energy intensity decreased most in the industry sector (2.4 % per year), followed by the agriculture sector (1.7 % per year), the services or tertiary sector (1.3 % per year), the transport sector (1.2 % per year) and the households sector (0.9 % per year). \u000a Since 1990, total final energy intensity in the EU has decreased by 35.2 %, at a rate of 1.6 % per year. \u000a The final energy intensity trend has varied among EEA countries between 2005 and 2017. The largest decreases, by more than 3 % per year, occurred in Ireland, Slovakia, Romania. The smallest decreases, by less than 1 %, occurred in Greece, Finland and Turkey. Final energy intensity increased in one country, Iceland, by 1.3 % per year \u000a gdp energy annual change rate energy intensity ENER ENER021 021 p1559 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1560 (dp1561 g19 Ven p1562 sg20 Nsg11 VEnvironmental context
\u000aOn 25 February 2015, the Communication on the Energy Union Strategy was adopted. The Energy Union Strategy has five mutually reinforcing and closely interrelated dimensions designed to bring greater energy security, sustainability and competitiveness to the EU:
\u000aThis indicator shows the extent to which energy consumption in various sectors (households, services, agriculture, industry and transport) is being decoupled from economic growth, thus underpinning (but not exhaustively addressing) assessments of progress towards energy efficiency. Relative decoupling occurs when energy consumption grows, albeit more slowly than the underlying driver. Absolute decoupling occurs when energy consumption is stable or falls while the driver grows.
\u000aA shift towards absolute decoupling would indicate that pressures on the environment from energy production and consumption are decreasing (because of avoided energy supply) but the magnitude of the impact depends both on the total amount of avoided energy consumption and on the implications for the energy mix (in other words, which fuels have been used less because of the reduction in final energy consumption).
\u000aPolicy context
\u000ap1563 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1564 (dp1565 g19 Ven p1566 sg20 Nsg11 V
Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency establishes a common framework of measures for the promotion of energy efficiency within the EU in order to achieve the headline target of a 20 % reduction in gross inland energy consumption by 2020. Member States are requested to set indicative targets. It is up to the individual Member States to decide whether they base their targets on gross inland consumption, final energy consumption, primary or final energy savings, or energy intensity.
At an EU summit in October 2014, EU countries agreed on a new energy efficiency target of 27 % or greater by 2030. The European Commission had proposed 30 % in its Communication on energy efficiency of 23 July 2014.
The level, evolution and structure of primary energy consumption provide an indication of the extent to which environmental pressures caused by energy production and consumption are likely to diminish or not. This indicator displays data disaggregated by fuel type, as the associated environmental impacts are fuel specific.
\u000aThe consumption of fossil fuels (such as crude oil, oil products, hard coal, lignite, and natural and derived gases) leads to resource depletion and emissions of greenhouse gases as well as emissions of air pollutants (e.g. sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides). This, in turn, has negative consequences for public health and biodiversity. The degree of environmental impact depends on the relative share of different fossil fuels and the extent to which pollution abatement measures are used. Natural gas, for instance, has approximately 40 % less carbon than coal per unit of energy content, and 25 % less carbon content than oil, and contains only marginal quantities of sulphur.
\u000aIncreasing the consumption of nuclear energy at the expense of fossil fuels contributes to greenhouse gas emission reductions, but comes with safety and nuclear waste issues.
\u000aRenewable energy consumption is more environmentally benign, as the exploitation of renewable energy sources does not give rise to greenhouse gas emissions (except land use change issues related to biomass and emissions related to the use of non-renewable energy during the construction of renewable energy installations). Renewable energy sources usually lead to significantly lower levels of air pollutants (except when related to biomass applications). Renewable energy can, however, affect landscapes and ecosystems (e.g. wind turbines severely affect the landscape and much land is needed for the production of biomass, which may have an impact on biodiversity).
\u000a\u000a
Directive (EU) 2018/2002 on energy efficiency puts forward a binding EU-wide 32.5 % energy savings target for 2030, following on from the previously set 20 % target by 2020. Member States are requested to set indicative targets. The EU target for 2020 is to limit primary energy consumption to 1 483 Mtoe. In 2018, taken together, the sum of all individual Member States' 2020 targets for primary energy consumption was 1 533 Mtoe, which is 3.3 % higher than the 2020 target defined for the EU under the Energy Efficiency Directive (1 483 Mtoe). The 2030 targets are expressed in primary and/or final energy consumption and are relative to the levels projected for 2030 of 1 887 Mtoe for primary energy consumption and 1 416 Mtoe for final energy consumption. A 32.5 % reduction would therefore result in primary energy consumption of 1 273 Mtoe and final energy consumption of 956 Mtoe in 2030.
p1595 sbtp1596 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1597 (dp1598 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-on-energy-efficiency-in-europe-3 p1599 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1600 (dp1601 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-on-energy-efficiency-in-europe-3/assessment p1602 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1603 (dp1604 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VENER037 p1605 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1606 (dp1607 g19 Ven p1608 sg20 Nsg11 VProgress on energy efficiency in Europe p1609 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1610 (dp1611 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs energy consumption in buildings decreasing in the EU? | Is final energy consumption in Europe becoming more efficient? p1612 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1613 (dp1614 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Progress on energy efficiency in Europe Over the period 1990-2016, the energy efficiency of end-use sectors improved by 30 % in the EU-28 countries at an annual average rate of 1.4 %/year. \u000a These improvements were driven by improvements in the industry sector (1.8 %/year) and the households sector (1.6 %/year). However, half of the efficiency gains achieved through technological innovation in the household sector were offset by the increasing number of electrical appliances and by larger homes. \u000a The rates of improvement were lower in the transport sector (0.9 %/year) and services sector (1.1 %/year). building codes space heating energy energy consumption energy efficiency ENER ENER037 037 p1615 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1616 (dp1617 g19 Ven p1618 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EED was approved by the European Parliament on 11 September 2012. It includes a set of new measures to meet the EU\u2019s 2020 energy efficiency target to reduce EU primary energy consumption by 20 %. Related documents are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/efficiency/eed/eed_en.htm. The legal definition and quantification of the EU energy efficiency target is the 'Union's 2020 energy consumption of no more than 1 474 Mtoe primary energy or no more than 1 078 Mtoe of final energy'. With the accession of Croatia, the target was revised to '1 483 Mtoe primary energy or no more than 1 086 Mtoe of final energy'. Under Article 3 of the EED, each Member State had to submit a report to the Commission including an indicative national energy efficiency target for 2020 (http://ec.europa.eu/energy/efficiency/eed/reporting_en.htm).
\u000aNEEAPs are intended to set energy savings targets and propose concrete measures and actions that would contribute to meeting the targets. They are submitted every 3 years: the third NEEAPs were submitted in April 2014.
\u000aMandatory CO2 standards for new passenger cars were introduced in 2009. The 2009 regulation set a 2015 target of 130 g/km for the fleet average of all manufacturers combined.
\u000aIndividual manufacturers were allowed a higher CO2 emission value depending on the average vehicle weight of their fleet. The heavier the average weight of the cars sold by a manufacturer, the higher the CO2 level allowed. A similar CO2 standard for new light-commercial vehicles was introduced in 2011. It set a target of 175 g/km for 2017. In July 2012, the European Commission put forward two regulatory proposals to set mandatory CO2 standards for new cars and vans in 2020. Target values of 95 g/km of CO2 for the new car fleet and 147 g/km of CO2 for vans for 2020 have been set.
\u000aThe Directive on Energy Performance in Buildings (EPBD) is the main legislative instrument affecting energy use and efficiency in the building sector in the EU. The Directive tackles both new build and existing housing stock. Originally approved in 2002, this Directive is now being replaced by a recast Directive that was approved on 19 May 2010.
\u000aThe Energy Labelling Directive 2010/30/EU is a framework Directive that facilitates the labelling of products so that the power consumption of one make and model can be compared to another, allowing consumers to make informed purchasing decisions.
\u000aThe Ecodesign Directive sets a framework for performance criteria for energy-using and energy-related products, which manufacturers must meet in order to legally bring their product to the market. Minimum requirements have to be fulfilled by appliances to get the European Commission label and to be introduced in the European market.
\u000aThe first Directive was adopted in 2005. Its scope was expanded in 2009 to all energy-related products. From September 2015, the Ecodesign Directive will concern heating equipment and the production of hot water, defining new levels of performance and features to meet new energy labels.
\u000aThis directive sets out targets for annual energy savings of 1 % per year for each Member State between 2008 and 2012. For the same period, strong incentives were given to Member States by the directive to ensure that suppliers of energy offer a certain level of energy service.
\u000aThe Roadmap presents actions in line with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95 % by 2050.
\u000aThe Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions prioritises four types of action for an energy-efficient Europe:
\u000a\u000a
This package sets legally binding targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 20 % below 1990 levels and to increase the share of renewable energy to 20 %, both by 2020 (10 % in transport). It will also help achieve the EU's objective of improving energy efficiency by 20 % within the same time frame.
\u000aThe climate and energy package consists of four legislative texts:
\u000a- A directive revising the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), which covers some 40 % of EU greenhouse gas emissions;
\u000a- An Effort Sharing Decision setting binding national targets for emissions from sectors not covered by the EU ETS;
\u000a- A directive setting binding national targets for increasing the share of renewable energy in the energy mix; and
\u000a- A directive creating a legal framework for the safe and environmentally sound use of carbon capture and storage technologies.
\u000aEuropean leaders committed themselves to reducing primary energy consumption by 20 % compared with projections for 2020. Energy efficiency is the most cost-effective way of reducing energy consumption while maintaining an equivalent level of economic activity. Improving energy efficiency also addresses the key energy challenges of climate change, energy security and competitiveness.
p1619 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1620 (dp1621 g19 Ven p1622 sg20 Nsg11 VDirective 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency establishes a common framework of measures for the promotion of energy efficiency within the European Union in order to achieve the headline target of a 20 % reduction in primary energy consumption. Member States are requested to set indicative targets. It is up to the Member states whether they base their targets on primary energy consumption, final energy consumption, primary or final energy savings, or energy intensity. However, this indicator does not monitor progress at EU level towards the energy efficiency target (different methodologies may be applied for this purpose particularly if the emphasis is on energy savings), but it does provide an indication of progress to date in achieving energy efficiency (in this context energy efficiency means mainly improvements in technological performance).
p1623 sbtp1624 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1625 (dp1626 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/large-combustion-plants-operating-in-europe-3 p1627 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1628 (dp1629 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/large-combustion-plants-operating-in-europe-3/assessment p1630 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1631 (dp1632 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VINDP001 p1633 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1634 (dp1635 g19 Ven p1636 sg20 Nsg11 VLarge combustion plants operating in Europe p1637 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1638 (dp1639 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow are large combustion plants distributed across the Member States of the European Union? | How has the large combustion plant sector in the European Union changed over the years? p1640 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1641 (dp1642 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Large combustion plants operating in Europe There are 3 664 large combustion plants in the EU-28. \u000a Installed capacity increased by 4 % overall between 2004 and 2017. The trend reached a maximum in 2012. \u000a The use of biomass, tripled from 2004 to 2017, although it was still used in relatively low amounts (6 % of the total in 2017). \u000a Solid fuels (coal, lignite, peat and other solid fossil fuels) and natural gas remain the main sources of fuel input but the amount used decreased by around 25 % in the period. This could reflect the shift in Europe\u2019s energy system from oil, coal and gas to renewable sources. \u000a The installed capacity of large combustion plants is not equally distributed across Europe: Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Poland, Spain and France ( in order of rank ), accounted for more than 65 % of total fuel input and operating capacity in 2017. industry energy air emissions INDP INDP001 001 p1643 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1644 (dp1645 g19 Ven p1646 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU has had policies on emissions from combustion plants since the 1980s. Between 2004 and 2015, two pieces of EU law were in place: the LCP Directive and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (EC, 2010). This EU legislation imposed specific emission limit values on emissions of NOx, SO2 and dust from plants with a thermal rated input equal to or greater than 50 MW. Since 1 January 2016, this legislation has been replaced by the IED (EC, 2010).
\u000aThe aim of EU policy on LCPs is to reduce emissions to air, water and land, including measures related to waste, to achieve a high level of protection of the environment as a whole. The focus with regard to LCPs is to reduce emissions of acidifying pollutants, particles and ozone precursors while also covering other environmental concerns (e.g. mercury emissions).
\u000aLegal instruments that address emissions from large combustion plants
\u000aEmissions from LCPs are subject to several EU-wide regulations:
\u000aPermit conditions including emission limit values must be based on BATs. The term \u2018best available techniques\u2019 refers to the most effective, and economically and technically viable methods of operation that reduce emissions and the impact on the environment.
\u000aTo define BATs, the European Commission organises an exchange of information between Member State experts, industry and environmental organisations. This process results in the production of BREFs. Each BREF contains information on the techniques and processes used in a specific industrial sector in the EU, current emission and fuel consumption trends, and techniques for the determination of BATs, as well as emerging techniques.
p1647 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1648 (dp1649 g19 Ven p1650 sg20 Nsg11 VNo target specified.
p1651 sbtp1652 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1653 (dp1654 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/industrial-waste-indicator p1655 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1656 (dp1657 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/industrial-waste-indicator/assessment-1 p1658 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1659 (dp1660 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VINDP004 p1661 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1662 (dp1663 g19 Ven p1664 sg20 Nsg11 VIndustrial waste in Europe p1665 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1666 (dp1667 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V1. Have the quantities of waste generated by industry in Europe changed in recent years? | 2. Did reported off-site transfers of industrial hazardous and non-hazardous waste change substantially between 2007 and 2016? | 3. Does E-PRTR data provide any evidence of increased recovery rates within the various industry sectors? p1668 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1669 (dp1670 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Industrial waste in Europe \u000a Total annual quantities of waste generation across industry remained generally static over the period 2010-2016. Taking the reported industry gross value added (GVA) into consideration, waste generation per unit of industrial output may be showing limited signs of decreasing. \u000a Data on E-PRTR waste movements (off-site transfers) from industrial sites does not indicate any significant downward trends in industrial waste transfers for hazardous or non-hazardous waste over the period 2007-2016. \u000a Based on E-PRTR data, the overall percentage of waste being transferred for recovery was actually lower in 2016 than in 2007. The recovery trend within different industry sectors is variable, but the data do not suggest substantial progress in increasing the fraction of waste recovery. \u000a industrial waste generation industrial waste transfers waste INDP INDP004 004 p1671 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1672 (dp1673 g19 Ven p1674 sg20 Nsg11 VThe Waste Framework Directive (WFD, 2008/98/EC) sets the overall structure that defines waste management activities across EU Member States. The WFD defines key concepts in relation to waste management including the definition of what constitutes \u2018waste\u2019 and the properties that require a waste to be classified as \u2018hazardous\u2019. In addition, Regulation 1013/2006 on Shipment of Waste specifies the conditions under which waste can be moved between countries and is very relevant to industrial wastes, particularly hazardous wastes, which are often shipped throughout Europe for the purposes of disposal or recovery.
\u000aThe primary policy initiative, specifically in relation to the regulation of industrial activities (including waste related aspects) is the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED \u2013 2010/75/EU), and its predecessor, the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPC \u2013 2008/1/EC). In general, the primary focus of the regulatory regime introduced under the IPPC and the IED is more on the management of environmental releases and there has been less emphasis on minimisation and/or recovery, including preparing waste for reuse, within the permitting process. The IED does include specific reference to the WFD in relation to minimising waste generation and managing waste in accordance with European law.
\u000aWhile for releases to air or water, the regulatory process normally specifies emission limits, there are generally no site specific targets set against which waste minimisation or waste recovery rates can be benchmarked. In practical terms, this tends to divert regulatory efforts towards those actions that can be measured, for example the installation of abatement technologies to minimise sulphur dioxide emissions, or the achievement of specific limit values for discharges to water. The nature of the regulatory approach to emissions to air and water also tends to generate more data. This allows for better measurements and the demonstration of improvements, with the data reported on waste (e.g. through the E-PRTR) tending to be less focussed as it is generally not used to assess compliance against a specific target.
\u000aOne of the key improvements introduced under the IED, compared with the previous IPPC process, is the concept of Best Available Techniques Conclusions (BATc). The BAT conclusion documents set out legally binding requirements for industrial activities, which must be integrated into installation permits within 4 years of the BATc documents being published. The implementation of BATc is likely to have some positive influence in terms of minimising resource use and waste generation, and promoting efficient management of materials and residue recovery, as the BATc documents address waste management techniques in a more focussed way than was the case under the IPPC. Each BATc document will typically have a number of specific waste and resource efficiency related conclusions, which must be implemented by IED installations. However, in general these waste related BAT conclusions tend to be qualitative, rather than setting specific quantitative targets. It thus remains to be seen exactly how effective the BATc process will be in terms of influencing waste generation and recovery levels.
\u000aApart from the specific waste management or industry related policies, other broader policy measures in the waste and resource efficiency area will also have an impact on industrial waste generation and recovery in the coming years, specifically policy measures in relation to the Circular Economy (CE). The 2018 Circular Economy Package sets out a strategic framework of measures that will help stimulate Europe's transition towards a circular economy, boost global competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and generate new jobs. As part of the circular economy package, the Commission will clarify rules on by-products and end-of-waste status, which will help support the development of industrial symbiosis \u2014 a process by which the waste of one company can become resources for another company. To promote resource efficient and innovative industrial processes, such as industrial symbiosis or re-manufacturing, the Commission supports innovative industrial initiatives under the financing programme Horizon 2020 and through Cohesion Policy funds.
\u000a\u000a
As part of the consultation with EEA member countries, a number of responses were received with specific national information and tools that may also be of use in providing further contextual information. Links to some of these sources of information are provided below, while other consultation responses have been incorporated into the indicator descriptive text. The EEA would like to thank those countries that provided consultation responses.
\u000aThere are no specific targets related to industrial waste management.Â
p1679 sbtp1680 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1681 (dp1682 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/imperviousness-change-2 p1683 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1684 (dp1685 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/imperviousness-change-2/assessment p1686 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1687 (dp1688 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI002 p1689 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1690 (dp1691 g19 Ven p1692 sg20 Nsg11 VImperviousness and imperviousness change in Europe p1693 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1694 (dp1695 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the extent, degree, dynamics and spatial pattern of surface sealing (imperviousness) in Europe? p1696 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1697 (dp1698 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Imperviousness and imperviousness change in Europe For the reference year 2015 , 85 861 km 2 of the total area covered by the EEA-39 countries were mapped and categorised as 'sealed surface' in the Copernicus imperviousness product. This corresponds to 1.466 % of the total EEA-39 area. \u000a Between 2006 and 2015, soil sealing (imperviousness) in all EEA-39 countries increased by a total of 3 859 km2 , an annual average increase of 429 km 2 . During this period, the average annual increase in soil sealing relative to country area varied from 0 % to 0.088 %. \u000a In 2015, the percentage of a countries' total area that was sealed also varied greatly, with values ranging from 16.17 % (Malta) to 0.07 % (Iceland). The highest sealing values, as a percentage of country area, occurred in small countries with high population densities, while the lowest sealing values can be found in large countries with low population densities. \u000a The average annual increase in sealing was 460 km 2 between 2006-2009, increasing to 492 km 2 for the 2009-2012 period and slowing to 334 km 2 for the 2012-2015 period. The slow-down in the sealing increase between the two reference periods occurred in 31 out of 39 countries. The same trend is visible for sealing figures normalised by the size of the country (the % of the country newly sealed on average annually for the three periods). \u000a The most problematic situation occurs in countries where there is already a high percentage of sealing and where the annual rate of increase relative to country area is high. Even more problematic are situations where, for 2012-2015, the rate of sealing increase is accelerating, in contrast to the general trend of a slowing rate of increase. \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a imperviousness imperviousness indicator sealing soil sealing sealed surface LSI LSI002 002 p1699 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1700 (dp1701 g19 Ven p1702 sg20 Nsg11 VThe main policy objective of this indicator is to measure the extent and dynamics (change) of soil sealing, resulting from the development of urban and other artificial land uses.
\u000aAt the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio in 2012 (Rio+20), world leaders identified land and soil degradation as a global problem and committed to 'strive to achieve a land degradation neutral world in the context of sustainable development'. At the EU level, the Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) includes a strong focus on the unsustainable use of land and soil, including explicitly the issue of soil sealing. In this context, the 7th EAP refers to a Commission Staff Working Document with the title 'Guidelines on best practice to limit, mitigate or compensate soil sealing' (SWD/2012/0101).
In addition, land take is explicitly mentioned in chapter 23 of the 7th EAP, stating that:
Every year more than 1 000 km² of land are taken for housing, industry, transport or recreational purposes. Such long-term changes are difficult or costly to reverse, and nearly always involve trade-offs between various social, economic and environmental needs. Environmental considerations including water protection and biodiversity conservation should be integrated into planning decisions relating to land use so that they are made more sustainable, with a view to making progress towards the objective of 'no net land take', by 2050.'
\u000aIn recognition of the importance of land in safeguarding natural resources, the Commission is considering a Communication on 'land as a resource'.
\u000aOther important references can be found in A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development (COM(2001)264) and the thematic documents related to it, such as the Commission Communication Towards a Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment (COM(2004)60), Cohesion Policy and Cities: the urban contribution to growth and jobs in the regions (COM(2006)385), Europe 2020 (COM(2010)2020), general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, as well as the concept of territorial cohesion.
p1703 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1704 (dp1705 g19 Ven p1706 sg20 Nsg11 VAlthough there are no quantitative targets for soil sealing/imperviousness at European level, different documents reflect the need for better planning to control urban growth and the extension of infrastructures. Policies relating explicitly to land use issues, and especially physical and spatial planning, have, until now, generally been the responsibility of the authorities in Member States. The European Commission's Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM(2011) 571) introduces, for the first time, a 'no net land take by 2050' initiative that would imply that all new urbanisation will either occur on brownfields or that any new land take will need to be compensated by reclaiming artificial land.
\u000aEuropean policy, although it has no spatial planning responsibility, sets the framing conditions for planning. At the European level, the 1999 European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), a non-binding framework that aims to coordinate various European regional policy impacts, already advocates the development of a sustainable, polycentric and balanced urban system with compact cities and a strengthening of the partnerships between urban and rural areas, as well as parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge, and wise management of natural areas and cultural heritage. The 2008 Green Paper on territorial cohesion, and the 2007 EU Territorial Agenda and Action Plan by the Territorial Agenda of the EU and the Action programme for its implementation (COPTA, 2007) build further on the ESDP. Specific, relevant actions in the field of 'Land', in particular are Action 2.1d 'Urban sprawl' and Action 2.2 'Territorial impact of EU policies'.
\u000aDemand for new urban areas may be partly satisfied by brownfield remediation. Its environmental advantages are clear: relieving pressure on rural areas and greenfield sites, reducing pollution costs, more efficient energy use and natural resource consumption, facilitating economic diversification and emerging habitat (housing) requirements. Europe has several examples of regional strategies for economic regeneration and brownfield development (The OECD Territorial Outlook 2001). On average, land recycling increased steadily between 1990 and 2012 on an annual basis, with considerable variation between countries, and within countries. Stronger links between EU urban and soil policies could encourage this further (e.g. following up respective 6th EAP Thematic strategies).
p1707 sbtp1708 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1709 (dp1710 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-in-management-of-contaminated-sites-3 p1711 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1712 (dp1713 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-in-management-of-contaminated-sites-3/assessment p1714 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1715 (dp1716 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI003 p1717 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1718 (dp1719 g19 Ven p1720 sg20 Nsg11 VProgress in management of contaminated sites p1721 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1722 (dp1723 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow is the problem of contaminated sites being addressed (clean-up of historical contamination and prevention of new contamination)? | How much is being spent on cleaning-up soil contamination ? How much of the public budget is being used ? | How much progress is being achieved in the management and control of soil contamination? | What is the estimated extent of soil contamination? | Which are the main contaminants affecting soil and groundwater in and around contaminated sites? | Which sectors contribute most to soil contamination ? p1724 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1725 (dp1726 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Progress in management of contaminated sites \u000a Local soil contamination in 2011 was estimated at 2.5 million potentially contaminated sites in the EEA-39, of which about 45 % have been identified to date. About one third of an estimated total of 342 000 contaminated sites in the EEA-39 have already been identified and about 15 % of these 342 000 sites have been remediated. However, there are substantial differences in the underlying site definitions and interpretations that are used in different countries. \u000a \u000a Four management steps are defined for the management and control of local soil contamination, namely site identification (or preliminary studies), preliminary investigations, main site investigations, and implementation of risk reduction measures. Progress with each of these steps provides evidence that countries are identifying potentially contaminated sites, verifying if these sites are actually contaminated and implementing remediation measures where these are required. Some countries have defined targets for the different steps. \u000a \u000a Thirty of the 39 countries surveyed maintain comprehensive inventories for contaminated sites: 24 countries have central national data inventories, while six countries, namely Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Germany, Greece, Italy and Sweden, manage their inventories at the regional level. Almost all of the inventories include information on polluting activities, potentially contaminated sites and contaminated sites. \u000a \u000a Contaminated soil continues to be commonly managed using \u201ctraditional\u201d techniques, e.g. excavation and off-site disposal, which accounts for about one third of management practices. In-situ and ex-situ remediation techniques for contaminated soil are applied more or less equally. \u000a \u000a Overall, the production sectors contribute more to local soil contamination than the service sectors, while mining activities are important sources of soil contamination in some countries. In the production sector, metal industries are reported as most polluting whereas the textile, leather, wood and paper industries are minor contributors to local soil contamination. Gasoline stations are the most frequently reported sources of contamination for the service sector. \u000a \u000a The relative importance of different contaminants is similar for both liquid and solid matrices. The most frequent contaminants are mineral oils and heavy metals. Generally, phenols and cyanides make a negligible overall contribution to total contamination. \u000a \u000a On average, 42 % of the total expenditure on the management of contaminated sites comes from public budgets. Annual national expenditures for the management of contaminated sites are on average about EUR 10.7 per capita. This corresponds to an average of 0.041 % of the national GDP. Around 81 % of the annual national expenditures for the management of contaminated sites is spent on remediation measures, while only 15 % is spent on site investigations. \u000a \u000a It should be noted that all results derive from data provided by 27 (out of 39) countries that returned the questionnaire, and not all countries answered all questions. \u000a funding mechanism management share public/private potentially contaminated site source pollution orphan site data inventory polluting activities/sectors groundwater contaminated site chemicals expenditure soil contamination management steps risk reduction measure polluting activities cost categories contaminated site management LSI LSI003 003 p1727 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1728 (dp1729 g19 Ven p1730 sg20 Nsg11 VThe overarching policy objective is to achieve a level of quality of the environment where man-made contaminants on sites do not give rise to significant impacts on or risks to human health and ecosystems.
\u000aLegal requirements for the general protection of soil have not been agreed at the European Union (EU) level and only exist in some Member States. However, the Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control Directive (IPPC 2008/1/EC) requires that operations falling under its scope do not create new soil contamination, and legislation not aimed directly at soil protection (e.g. the Water Framework Directive (WFD 2000/60/EC), the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) and Landfill Directive (99/31/EC)) provides indirect controls on soil contamination and requirements for its management where applicable. Furthermore, the Directive on Industrial Emissions (IED 2010/75/EU) provides a regulatory framework to prevent emissions to soil from large industrial plants; it will repeal the IPPC Directive with effect from 7 January 2014. Notwithstanding these and similar controls in non-EU Member States, significant new site contamination still occurs as a result of accidents and illegal activities.
\u000aWhile the creation of new contaminated sites is constrained by regulation, a very large number of sites exist with historical contamination that may present unacceptable risks, and these sites need to be properly managed.
p1731 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1732 (dp1733 g19 Ven p1734 sg20 Nsg11 VNo European targets to reduce local soil contamination have yet been established. National targets exist in many EEA member and cooperating countries. The table provides an overview of existing national/regional targets. These take a variety of forms, for example by referencing timelines for remediation of historic contamination or specific management steps or lists of national priority sites. Since the last data request in 2006, nine countries have established new policy targets relating to the management of contaminated sites and in total 17 countries report official policy targets for the management of contaminated sites.
\u000aOverview of existing policy targets for local soil contamination.
\u000a| \u000a Country \u000a | \u000a\u000a Year \u000a | \u000a\u000a Policy or technical target \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Austria \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2025 | \u000a\u000a Identification of contaminated sites completed Remediation and re-integration of identified contaminated sites into economic and natural cycle \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Belgium (Flanders) \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2036 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Remediation started on sites with potentially contaminating activities and/or that are considered to be contaminated \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Croatia \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2025 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Remediation of "hot spots", locations in the environment which are highly burdened with waste \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Czech Republic \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2040 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Political/technical level [government decree]: Environmental remediation of uranium and coal facilities DIAMO \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Denmark \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2016 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Site identifications and preliminary investigations are completed nationwide \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Estonia \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2030 \u000a | \u000a\u000a All contaminated areas to be remediated or sustained \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Hungary \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2050 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Handling of all historic contaminated sites. The Gov. Decision No. 2205/1996. (VIII.24.) adopted the National Environmental Remediation Programme (OKKP), which has three stages: short, medium and long. \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99 \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2018 | \u000a\u000a Drafting of land cadastre and developing monitoring system | \u000a
| \u000a Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2008-2014 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Implementation of the closure/remediation measures for the top three hotspots from the annex 1 \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Montenegro \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2008-2012 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Recovery and/or closure of existing dumpsites, remediation of hot-spots (contaminated sites), construction of regional sanitary landfills \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Netherlands \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2015 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Bringing risk at sites to an acceptable level for the current land use | \u000a
| \u000a Norway \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2012 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Handling of (approx. 250) sites completed, where pollution is shown to be most serious, i.e. where pollution is released to priority areas or can pose a human health risk \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Romania \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2020 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Environmental remediation of the majority of polluted areas \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Serbia \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2014 | \u000a\u000a Priority list for remediation will be established. | \u000a
| \u000a Slovakia \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2015 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Remediation of the contaminated sites with the highest risk to human health and environment (to reach "good status of water" with respect to the Water Framework Directive) \u000a | \u000a
| \u000a Sweden \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2050 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Environmental objective: a non-toxic environment | \u000a
| \u000a Switzerland \u000a | \u000a\u000a 2025 \u000a | \u000a\u000a Remediation or containment of historic soil contamination \u000a | \u000a
Sources: Eionet data flows 2006 and 2011
\u000aNote: new policy targets (since the last assessment in 2007) are highlighted; outdated policy targets have been deleted
p1735 sbtp1736 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1737 (dp1738 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/soil-organic-carbon-1 p1739 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1740 (dp1741 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/soil-organic-carbon-1/assessment p1742 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1743 (dp1744 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI005 p1745 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1746 (dp1747 g19 Ven p1748 sg20 Nsg11 VSoil organic carbon p1749 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1750 (dp1751 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in soil organic carbon in Europe? p1752 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1753 (dp1754 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Soil organic carbon \u000a Soil carbon stocks in the EU-27 are around 75 billion tonnes of carbon; around 50 % of which is located in Ireland, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom (because of the large area of peatlands in these countries). \u000a The largest emissions of CO 2 from soils are due to conversion (drainage) of organic soils, and amount to 20\u201340 tonnes of CO 2 per hectare per year. The most effective option to manage soil carbon in order to mitigate climate change is to preserve existing stocks in soils, and especially the large stocks in peat and other soils with a high content of organic carbon. \u000a On average, soils in Europe are most likely to be accumulating carbon. Soils under grassland and forests are a carbon sink (estimated up to 80 million tonnes of carbon per year) whereas soils under arable land are a smaller carbon source (estimated from 10\u201340 million tonnes of carbon per year). \u000a The effects of climate change on soil organic carbon and soil respiration are complex, and depend on distinct climatic and biotic drivers. However, they lack rigorous supporting datasets. \u000a \u000a \u000a Climate change is expected to have an impact on soil carbon in the long term, but changes in the short term will more likely be driven by land management practices and land use change \u000a soil land use carbon climate change LSI LSI005 005 p1755 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1756 (dp1757 g19 Ven p1758 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013 the European Commission presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package (http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/documentation_en.htm). This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change /* COM/2013/0216 final */ and a number of supporting documents. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which should occur through Bridging the knowledge gap and Further developing Climate-ADAPT as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Further objectives include Promoting action by Member States and Climate-proofing EU action: promoting adaptation in key vulnerable sectors. Many EU Member States have already taken action, such as by adopting national adaptation strategies, and several have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation.
\u000aThe European Commission and the European Environment Agency have developed the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT, http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/) to share knowledge on observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health; on relevant research; on EU, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans; and on adaptation case studies.
p1759 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1760 (dp1761 g19 Ven p1762 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p1763 sbtp1764 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1765 (dp1766 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-retention-4 p1767 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1768 (dp1769 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/water-retention-4/assessment p1770 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1771 (dp1772 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI007 p1773 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1774 (dp1775 g19 Ven p1776 sg20 Nsg11 VSoil moisture p1777 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1778 (dp1779 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow does climate change affect soil moisture in Europe? p1780 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1781 (dp1782 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Soil moisture \u000a Harmonised in situ data on soil moisture are not available across the EU. Modelled soil moisture content has significantly decreased in the Mediterranean region and increased in parts of northern Europe since the 1950s, as a result of past warming and precipitation changes. \u000a Significant decreases in summer soil moisture content in the Mediterranean region and increases in north-eastern Europe are projected for the coming decades. \u000a soil moisture climate emissions trends and projections trends LSI LSI007 007 p1783 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1784 (dp1785 g19 Ven p1786 sg20 Nsg11 VIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe.
\u000aOne of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is Better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aFurther objectives include Promoting adaptation in key vulnerablesectors through climate-proofing EU sector policies and Promoting action by Member States. Most EU Member States have already adopted national adaptation strategies and many have also prepared action plans on climate change adaptation. The EC also supports adaptation in cities through the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy initiative.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. The 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
p1787 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1788 (dp1789 g19 Ven p1790 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets have been specified.
p1791 sbtp1792 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1793 (dp1794 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/land-recycling-and-densification p1795 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1796 (dp1797 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/land-recycling-and-densification/assessment-1 p1798 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1799 (dp1800 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI008 p1801 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1802 (dp1803 g19 Ven p1804 sg20 Nsg11 VLand recycling and densification p1805 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1806 (dp1807 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow significant is green land recycling in Europe in relation to land take? | How significant is grey land recycling in Europe in relation to land take? | How significant is land densification in Europe in relation to land take? | What is the extent of land recycling in Europe? p1808 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1809 (dp1810 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Land recycling and densification \u000a Land recycling is still low in all European countries: on average, land recycling accounted for only 13.5 % of total land consumption in European cities in the 2006-2012 period. \u000a The land use densification process, i.e. when land development makes maximum use of existing infrastructure, accounts for the largest proportion of land recycling. However, in most countries, land take dominates over densification in total land management with the exception of Finland and France. \u000a Grey recycling, i.e. internal conversions between residential and/or non-residential land cover types, is secondary to densification, ranging from 14 % to less than 1 % of total land consumption. Land take predominates over grey recycling in total land management in all countries. \u000a Green recycling, i.e. the development of green urban areas using previously built-up areas, is an important trend that reverses soil sealing, but it is a marginal process in all countries and, on average, it accounts for only 0.2 % of total land consumption. \u000a land use functional urban areas land take urbanisation LSI LSI008 008 p1811 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1812 (dp1813 g19 Ven p1814 sg20 Nsg11 VOngoing land take and soil sealing have long been a cause for concern at EU level.
\u000aResource efficiency has become a top environmental priority, identified as one of the seven Flagship Initiatives of the Europe 2020 Strategy, which supports a shift towards a resource-efficient, low-carbon economy for sustainable growth. Accordingly, one of the objectives of the EU's Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe is that 'by 2020, EU policies take into account their direct and indirect impact on land use, and the rate of land take is on track with the aim of achieving no net land take by 2050'.
\u000aThe recognition that our land resources must be conserved is also articulated in the EU's Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP). The 7th EAP states that 'the degradation, fragmentation and unsustainable use of land in the Union is jeopardising the provision of several key ecosystem services, threatening biodiversity and increasing Europe\u2019s vulnerability to climate change and natural disasters. (...) Every year more than 1 000 km2 of land are taken for housing, industry, transport or recreational purposes. Such long-term changes are difficult or costly to reverse, and nearly always involve trade-offs between various social, economic and environmental needs'. In this regard, the EU made a commitment in the 7th EAP to limit land take by setting the goal of 'no net land take, by 2050'.
\u000aOne of the key responses to the question of how land governance can reduce pressure on land resources by limiting land take and soil sealing is to increase land recycling. In this regard, Science for Environment Policy Future Brief 14 (EC, 2016) highlights the key role of the reuse and redevelopment of brownfield sites in achieving the \u2018no net land take\u2019 goal. The SOER 2015 thematic briefing on land systems (EEA, 2015) also states that, in order to prevent an increase in land take, incentives for 'land recycling' are worth pursuing.
\u000aIn the European Commission's 'Guidelines on best practice to limit, mitigate or compensate soil sealing\u2019 (EC, 2012), one of the best practices mentioned is 'creating incentives for recycling land instead of developing new sites, for example requiring proof that no reasonable alternative to conversion of new land exists, and highlighting the potential of brownfield sites (many of which are well embedded in existing infrastructure and are not contaminated, thus avoiding overestimation of development costs)'.
\u000aThere are also specific examples at country level of approaches to land planning that include land recycling as a priority. For instance, in Germany, the council of the joint community Barnstorf decided, in 2009, to follow a sustainable land management approach: in principle, it was decided that, in the future, residential and commercial areas should be created through internal development, recycling and reuse, allowing for the conversion of greenfield sites in only exceptional cases depending on public costs and benefits (EC, 2012).
p1815 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1816 (dp1817 g19 Ven p1818 sg20 Nsg11 VThere are no specific quantitative targets for land recycling in Europe. There are different policy documents that mention land recycling as an important response to reduce the negative impact of soil sealing, land take and/or urban sprawl when it comes to urban development.
\u000aIn this regard, the European Commission's Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM(2011) 571) introduces for the first time a 'no net land take by 2050' initiative that implies either that all new urbanisation should occur on brownfield sites or that any new land take will need to be compensated for by the reclamation of artificial land.
\u000aThis should be interpreted to mean that land recycling and densification rates must show an increasing trend, which would result in a direct contribution to reducing net land take, thus facilitating the achievement of the policy objective.
p1819 sbtp1820 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1821 (dp1822 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/land-productivity-dynamics p1823 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1824 (dp1825 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/land-productivity-dynamics/assessment p1826 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1827 (dp1828 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI009 p1829 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1830 (dp1831 g19 Ven p1832 sg20 Nsg11 VVegetation productivity p1833 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1834 (dp1835 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VClimatic drivers of vegetation productivity change in major European ecosystems. | Land use drivers of vegetation productivity change. | Vegetation productivity change in Europe during 2000-2016. p1836 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1837 (dp1838 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Vegetation productivity Vegetation productivity indicates the spatial distribution and change of the vegetation cover - a key characteristic of ecosystem condition. \u000a Vegetation productivity in Europe on average has a regional pattern of increase and decline. Increase was observed most in South Eastern Europe, over croplands and wetlands in the Steppic region and grasslands and sparsely vegetated lands and in the Black Sea and Anatolian regions. Decline happened most over croplands and grasslands in the Atlantic region as well as over wetlands in the Alpine region. \u000a Climate has important influence on vegetation productivity in Europe. Strongest driver is precipitation, especially in the South Eastern regions. Decreasing number of frost days increased productivity in the Pannonian region but decreased productivity in the Atlantic region. \u000a \u000a Climatic variations are important drivers of vegetation productivity, but land use changes are even stronger. Productivity was most increased by agricultural land management and converting other lands to agriculture, whereas largest decrease was caused by sprawling urban areas. soil land use vegetation productivity precipitation temperature LSI LSI009 009 p1839 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1840 (dp1841 g19 Ven p1842 sg20 Nsg11 VAddressing ecosystem services and their complex interactions call for a coherent approach to understand the coupled human-environment system.
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the 7th EU Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) to 2020, \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019. Degradation of ecosystems is recognized as one of the major threats to the provision of ecosystem services, biodiversity and Europe\u2019s resilience to climate change and natural disasters within the 7th Environmental Action Plan, priority objective 1, paragraph 23. Priority objective 5, paragraph 66 stats that environmental monitoring is one cornerstones of the Unions environmental policy and within Priority objective 5, paragraph 71 mapping and assessment of ecosystem services are recognized as a necessary basis for developing the most appropriate responses to environmental change.
\u000aThe 7th EAP is intended to help guide EU action on environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020. It highlights that \u2018Action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will increase the resilience of the Union\u2019s economy and society, while stimulating innovation and protecting the Union\u2019s natural resources.\u2019 Consequently, several priority objectives of the 7th EAP refer to climate change adaptation.
\u000aIn April 2013, the European Commission (EC) presented the EU Adaptation Strategy Package. This package consists of the EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change(COM/2013/216 final) and a number of supporting documents. The overall aim of the EU Adaptation Strategy is to contribute to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives of the EU Adaptation Strategy is better informed decision-making, which will be achieved by bridging the knowledge gap and further developing the European climate adaptation platform (Climate-ADAPT) as the \u2018one-stop shop\u2019 for adaptation information in Europe. Climate-ADAPT has been developed jointly by the EC and the EEA to share knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and sub-national adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
\u000aIn September 2016, the EC presented an indicative roadmap for the evaluation of the EU Adaptation Strategy by 2018.
\u000aBiodiversity and ecosystem stability are tightly intertwined as \u201cbiodiversity loss reduces the efficiency by which ecological communities capture biologically essential resources, produce biomass, decompose and recycle biologically essential nutrients\u201d. To halt the loss of Biodiversity and manage related ecosystem dynamics and degradation the EU states maintenance and restoration of ecosystems as target 2 of the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020.
\u000aThe Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 calls Member States to map and assess the state of ecosystems and their services in their national territory.
p1843 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1844 (dp1845 g19 Ven p1846 sg20 Nsg11 VNo specific target.
p1847 sbtp1848 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1849 (dp1850 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/drought-impact-on-vegetation-productivity p1851 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1852 (dp1853 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/drought-impact-on-vegetation-productivity/assessment p1854 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1855 (dp1856 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VLSI011 p1857 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1858 (dp1859 g19 Ven p1860 sg20 Nsg11 VVegetation response to water deficit in Europe p1861 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1862 (dp1863 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAnswer to unknown question | Vegetation productivity anomalies due to drought during 2000-2016 p1864 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1865 (dp1866 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Vegetation response to water deficit in Europe Monitoring vegetation response to water deficit due to droughts is necessary to be able to introduce effective measures to increase the resilience of ecosystems in line with the EU\u2019s nature restoration plan \u2014 a key element of the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030. Between 2000 and 2016, Europe was affected by severe droughts, causing average yearly vegetation productivity losses covering around 121 000 km 2 . This was particularly notable in 2003, when drought affected most parts of Europe, covering an estimated 330 000 km 2 of forests, non-irrigated arable land and pastures. Drought impact was also relatively severe in 2005 and 2012. land cover ecosystems drought impact productivity biodiversity LSI LSI011 011 p1867 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1868 (dp1869 g19 Ven p1870 sg20 Nsg11 VEnvironmental policy is highly dependent on the monitoring and assessment of its targets, be it land take, biodiversity loss, environmental pollution or land degradation. In May 2011, the EU adopted a Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, which identifies 6 priority targets and 20 actions for the European Union to reach the target of "Halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss". For the EU, the opportunity cost of not reaching the 2020 biodiversity headline target of halting the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services has been estimated at 50 billion EUR per year[1]. In addition, to undermining these economic benefits, loss of biodiversity means that ecosystems and societies that rely upon them are more fragile and less resilient in the face of challenges such as climate change, pollution and habitat destruction. Droughts have an impact on several land and soil functions, as well as ecosystem services, both in urban and rural areas. For example, droughts have an impact on water resources available for human use in agriculture, cause habitat loss, migration of local species and their replacement by alien ones in open rural systems, and consequently soil erosion and biodiversity degradation. By pressuring natural ecosystems, droughts hamper the achievement of EU Biodiversity 2020 objectives.
\u000aDrought pressure on natural ecosystems has also an important role on the implementation of the EU Strategy on Green Infrastructure (GI). In contrast to the most common \u2018grey\u2019 (man-made, constructed) infrastructure approaches that serve one single objective, GI promotes multifunctionality, which means that the same area of land is able to perform several functions and offer multiple benefits if its ecosystems are in a healthy state. More specifically, GI aims to enhance nature's ability to deliver multiple valuable ecosystem goods and services, potentially providing a wide range of environmental, social, climate change adaptation and mitigation, and biodiversity benefits. Drought diminishes the normal condition of ecosystems and their capacity to provide services that could be integrated in green infrastructures.
\u000aUnder EU legislation adopted in May 2018, EU Member States have to ensure that greenhouse gas emissions from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) are offset by at least an equivalent removal of CO\u2082 from the atmosphere in the period 2021 to 2030. Ultimately, the capacity of forests and soils on a given area of land to remove carbon from the atmosphere will depend on a number of natural (regional/geographical) circumstances such as variations in growing conditions (temperature, precipitation and droughts) and natural disturbances (storms, fires) as well as past and present management practices (e.g. rotation lengths which affect the distribution of age classes in forest stands). By measuring changes in emissions and removals relative to business-as-usual projections, these circumstances (such as drought pressure) will be "factored out" so that only changes related directly human-induced activities are measured. This also provides incentives for improving on the current situation and gives an equal value to mitigation whether through sequestration or conservation or material and energy substitution.
\u000aThe role of the CAP is to provide a policy framework that supports and encourages producers to address economic, environmental (i.e. relating to resource efficiency, soil and water quality and threats to habitats and biodiversity) and territorial challenges, while remaining coherent with other EU policies. This translates into three long-term CAP objectives: viable food production, sustainable management of natural resources and climate action and balanced territorial development. Given the pressure of drought on natural resources, agriculture has to improve its environmental performance through more sustainable production methods. Farmers have also to adapt to challenges stemming from changes to the climate by pursuing climate change mitigation and adaption actions (e.g. by developing greater resilience to disasters such as flooding, drought and fire). Understanding the spatio-temporal distribution of drought pressures on land, will contribute to a better, faster and more informed implementation of CAP reforms and improve the quality of life of rural populations in Europe.
\u000aNo specific targets.
p1875 sbtp1876 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1877 (dp1878 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/trends-in-marine-alien-species-mas-3 p1879 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1880 (dp1881 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/trends-in-marine-alien-species-mas-3/assessment p1882 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1883 (dp1884 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VMAR002 p1885 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1886 (dp1887 g19 Ven p1888 sg20 Nsg11 VTrends in marine non-indigenous species p1889 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1890 (dp1891 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1892 (dp1893 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Trends in marine non-indigenous species Available data show that around 1 223 non-indigenous species (NIS) are present in the Europe\u2019s seas, of which almost 81% (1 039) were recorded in the period 1949-2017. The species in question consist mostly of invertebrates (approx. 63 %). \u000a The number of NIS is highest in the Mediterranean Sea, where almost 69 % (838) of all NIS have been recorded. A total of 21% (256) were recorded in the North-East Atlantic Ocean, 5 % (66) in the Baltic Sea and 3 % (32) in the Black Sea. \u000a Mean numbers of new NIS recorded in the period of 2006-2011 (calculated for 6 yearly periods) were 28 species per year. The rate of new NIS recording slowed down to 16 species per year during the 2012-2017 period. \u000a More than 80 of NIS species were identified as 'invasive alien species' (IAS) with a high potential to negative impact biodiversity and cause economic and social consequences. marine and coastal non-indigenous species MAR MAR002 002 p1894 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1895 (dp1896 g19 Ven p1897 sg20 Nsg11 VSeveral policies for the marine environment address IAS, in particular through the animal health regime (various regulations and directives) and the Regulation on the use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture (EC 708/2007). More broadly, the Birds Directive (2009/147/EC, BD), the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC,HD), the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC, WFD), the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC, MSFD) and the Regulation on aquaculture (EC 708/2007) require the restoration of ecological conditions and refer to the need to take NIS into consideration. Nevertheless, it was considered that this existing union action left most IAS unaddressed.
\u000aThe European Commission formally recognised the urgent need to tackle invasions in Europe in its Communication 'Towards an EU Strategy on Invasive Species' (COM 789/2008), in 2008. The EU Biodiversity Strategy Regulation (COM/2011/0244 ) \u2014 which translates the international commitments adopted by the parties to the Convention for Biological Diversity in 2010 in Nagoya, Japan \u2014 further identified combating IAS as key to safeguarding European biodiversity, and sets a dedicated target and actions. In particular, it identified the need for a specific EU legislative instrument that could tackle outstanding challenges relating, inter alia, to IAS pathways, early detection and response, and containment and management of IAS. As a result, in 2014, the European Commission adopted a Regulation on the prevention and management of invasive alien species in Europe (EU 1143/2014). It aims to bring a more comprehensive approach to deal with IAS in Europe, across all environments. The Regulation establishes rules to prevent, minimise and mitigate the adverse impact on biodiversity of their intentional and unintentional introduction and spread within the EU. It indicates three types of intervention: prevention, early warning and rapid response; and management to tackle the problem. A list of marine invasive NIS of EU concern was updated in 2019, so as to guide implementation of the Regulation. This regulation should therefore be able to integrate and ensure consistency of existing EU, global, regional and national initiatives in order to increase their effectiveness in combating invasive alien species.
\u000aOther international agreements cover different groups of NIS and begin to address NIS as a threat to biodiversity:
\u000aThe four Regional Sea Conventions (OSPAR, HELCOM, Black Sea Commission, UNEP/MAP) have also been active in developing regional action to address NIS and are increasingly streamlining their efforts with relevant EU policy implementation. Synergies in the work to implement the ecosystem approach \u2014 taking into account the HELCOM Roadmap \u2014 are discussed between HELCOM and OSPAR, Bonn Agreement, Black Sea Commission and International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) Joint Assessment and Monitoring Programme (JAMP) and set the basis on which the OSPAR Contracting Parties will work together in fulfilling these obligations over the period 2010-2014. UNEP/MAP (2014) set a monitoring protocol to be implemented by contracting parties for producing the data necessary to calculate the NIS trend indicator. The Black Sea Commission is also working on MSFD guiding improvements in the Black Sea Integrated Monitoring System (MISIS).
\u000aOSPAR continues its close cooperation with the Helsinki Commission in the Baltic Sea on the development and adoption of Joint Guidelines on the granting of exemptions from the IMO BWMC, allowing a consistent approach across Northern Europe to minimise the risk of the introduction of NIS.
p1898 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1899 (dp1900 g19 Ven p1901 sg20 Nsg11 VTarget 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 on combating invasive alien species (IAS) determines that 'By 2020, Invasive Alien Species and their pathways are identified and prioritised, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and pathways are managed to prevent the introduction and establishment of new IAS'.
\u000aThe MSFD's main objective is to reach Good Environmental Status (GES) of the marine environment, by 2020. It has 11 environmental quality descriptors to determine GES. Descriptor 2 addresses NIS, stating 'Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems'. The initial reporting of Member States in 2012 did not provide regionally harmonised information. A baseline for the number of NIS in EU Member States has been recently established. Number of introductions compatible with good environmental status (so called threshold values) are currently being discussed.
p1902 sbtp1903 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1904 (dp1905 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/trends-in-marine-alien-species-1 p1906 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1907 (dp1908 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/trends-in-marine-alien-species-1/assessment p1909 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1910 (dp1911 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VMAR003 p1912 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1913 (dp1914 g19 Ven p1915 sg20 Nsg11 VPathways of introduction of marine non-indigenous species to European seas p1916 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1917 (dp1918 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre policies for controlling the pathways of marine biological invasions effective? p1919 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1920 (dp1921 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Pathways of introduction of marine non-indigenous species to European seas Since 1949, 1 039 non-indigenous species have been introduced into European seas. \u000a The largest proportion of NIS introductions into European seas are associated with the shipping (49.1%) and corridor pathway (33 %: Suez Canal, inland canals). These are followed by unintentional movement of live organisms as contaminants (11 %) and escapees from aquaria, aquaculture and mariculture (5.1 %). Intentional releases in nature account for 1.7 % of NIS. \u000a Main vectors for transfer of NIS by vessels are ballast waters (346 species) and boat hull fouling (287). \u000a Shipping is the major pathway for introductions in all regional seas. Specifically, 45% of NIS introductions into Eastern Mediterranean and 82% in the Black Sea are associated with the shipping pathway. \u000a Corridors are the main pathway in the Eastern Mediterranean, where more than 46 % of NIS was introduced via the Suez Canal. 14.5 % of NIC was introduced via inland canals in the Baltic Sea. \u000a Transport contaminants (directly related to oyster aquaculture) are responsible for more than 30 % of introductions in the North-East Atlantic (Celtic, Iberian, Icelandic and North Seas). \u000a While NIS introductions still occur, the rate of NIS introductions decreases in the time period 2006-2017 in all regional seas. The decreasing trend can be assigned to polices effectiveness as well as to other reasons, such as decreasing pool of potential NIS species, variations in sampling effort or available expertise. \u000a In some of EU Member States, the number of new marine species introduced via human activity has already been reduced to zero. \u000a Monitoring is not considered to sufficiently cover all the hot spot areas for new introductions. Identification of the areas that are most at risk of becoming invaded, as early detection mechanism will increase chances of eradication of invasive species. marine and coastal non-indigenous species MAR MAR003 003 p1922 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1923 (dp1924 g19 Ven p1925 sg20 Nsg11 VInvasive species are addressed in European and global legislation.
\u000aThe MSFD (Directive 2008/56/EC amended by 2017/845/EC), which is the environmental pillar of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy, sets an overall objective to reach or maintain 'Good Environmental Status' (GES) in European marine waters, by 2020. One of the objectives addresses \u2018Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities, that shall be at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems\u2019. The MSFD aims to set up an effective management system to prevent further introductions and limit the impacts of NIS already introduced (EU, 2017) and addresses:
\u000a- newly-introduced non-indigenous species;
\u000a- established non-indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species; and
\u000a- species groups and broad habitat types that are at risk from non-indigenous species.
\u000aOverall, policies are split per pathway, but you could add somewhere that the measures established under the MSFD (D2) are expected to have some effect on the reduction of introductions and impact of NIS in the marine environment.
\u000aThe EU Regulation (EU, 2014) addresses exclusively invasive alien species (IAS) and aims to increase coordination among existing legal instruments. It includes innovative pathway-related measures, aiming to provide a holistic framework for the assessment, management and prevention of NIS.
\u000aOther legislation relevant for management of NIS includes: Regulation (708/2007/EC) on the use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture; Regulation (338/97/EC) on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade; Directive (2000/29/EC) on protective measures against the introduction of organisms harmful to plants or plant products; and Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) in the filed water policy.
\u000aA number of International policies are in place. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 2014), adopted in the EU by the Biodiversity Strategy (COM(2011) 244 final) has the overall objective of halting biodiversity loss and also addresses the reduction in the impacts of alien species. The EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 Target 5, states that 'By 2020, IAS and their pathways are identified and prioritised, priority species are controlled or eradicated and pathways are managed to prevent the introduction and establishment of new IAS' (EC, 2011).
\u000aShipping is an important vector for NIS introduction, addressed by the ballast waters convention implementation (IMP, 2017; IUCN, 2017) The convention entered into force in 2017, meaning that ships must manage their ballast water so that aquatic organisms and pathogens are removed or rendered harmless before the ballast water is released to a new location. This will help prevent the spread of invasive species as well as potentially harmful pathogens (International Maritime Organization (IMO)).
\u000aRegional Seas Conventions contribute to implementing this through supporting the ratification and implementation of IMO conventions.
\u000aThe number of alien species is highest in the Mediterranean, where countries agreed on the Action Plan concerning Species Introductions and Invasive Species (UNEP MAP, 2017), because of the Suez Canal and Lessepsian migration from the Red Sea (Fox, 1924), in conjunction with the Aswan Dam construction in the 1960s. This construction removed the protection zone for the spread of IAS throughout Suez, represented by the freshwater buffer in the Nile River (Zakaria, 2015). Until the construction of the dam, this water was a relatively effective control of NIS.
\u000aThe Baltic Sea coastal countries cooperate within HELCOM (Helsinki Commission). One of their activities was to work toward harmonized implementation of the 2004 Ballast Water Management Convention of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO, 2004) in the Baltic Sea area (HELCOM, 2014).
\u000aThe Convention on Biological Diversity has defined a Strategic Plan for the period 2011-2020. This plan consists of five strategic goals, including twenty Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Among the latter, Aichi target 11 foresees that by 2020, at least 10 % of coastal and marine areas are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures.
\u000aArticle 21 of the MSFD requires a progress report on protected areas to be sent to the European Council and Parliament by the Commission. This indicator can provide concrete input to such a process.
p1954 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1955 (dp1956 g19 Ven p1957 sg20 Nsg11 VThe Convention on Biological Diversity Aichi Target 11 states: By 2020, at least [...] 10 % of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscape and seascape.
p1958 sbtp1959 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1960 (dp1961 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/aquaculture-production-4 p1962 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1963 (dp1964 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/aquaculture-production-4/assessment p1965 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1966 (dp1967 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VMAR008 p1968 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1969 (dp1970 g19 Ven p1971 sg20 Nsg11 VAquaculture production in Europe p1972 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1973 (dp1974 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs aquaculture production in Europe increasing? p1975 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1976 (dp1977 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Aquaculture production in Europe \u000a Marine aquaculture production is increasing in Europe (EEA39) since the early 1990s , mostly due to salmon production in Norway which is the main producer. For the same period of time, inland aquaculture in Europe is stable, and the main producer is Turkey, indicating that much of Europe's aquaculture production takes place outside the EU28 (Figure 3). \u000a In 2015, the most cultivated species in Europe (EEA39) was Atlantic salmon, while in the EU28 blue mussels were dominant. Other important species include rainbow trout, European sea bass, gilthead sea bream, oysters and carps, barbels and other cyprinids. \u000a The countries that contribute the most to European production (EEA39) are Norway (approximately 46 % of total European production), followed by Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Greece (Figure 6). These seven countries account for 90 % of all aquaculture production in Europe. Norway\u2019s production is nearly all due to the farming of Atlantic salmon. Turkish production consists mainly of trout (inland), sea bream and sea bass (marine). \u000a aquaculture marine area inland water MAR MAR008 008 p1978 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1979 (dp1980 g19 Ven p1981 sg20 Nsg11 VOver the last 30 years, the EU has introduced many legislative instruments that have led to the implementation of national legislation relevant to the management of the environmental impact of aquaculture. The EU has also introduced environmental provisions to safeguard the environmental protection of the aquatic environment. In the context of marine aquaculture, environmental protection measures have been established at three levels: (1) general policy; (2) specific measures; and (3) regulations that control specific local conditions. More recently, the EU has developed a strategy for its maritime activities in which aquaculture is seen as a strategic sector with high potential for sustainable growth and jobs.
\u000aThe key EU environmental policies that aim to ensure safe and healthy aquatic environments, on which aquaculture is dependent, are the 2000 Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the 2008 Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The general objective of the WFD is to achieve good ecological status and good chemical status for all surface waters by 2015, including transitional and coastal waters. The MSFD aims to reach or maintain good environmental status of the marine environment by 2020 by adopting an ecosystem approach.
\u000aThe Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), for which the latest reform process took place between 2009 and 2013, is set to ensure that the exploitation of living aquatic resources provides sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. For this purpose, the EU shall apply a precautionary approach in taking measures designed to protect and conserve living aquatic resources, to provide for their sustainable exploitation and to minimise the impact of fishing activities on marine ecosystems. The new CFP entered into force in 2014 (Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013) and it aims to ensure that 'fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable in the long-term and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies'.
\u000aThe new CFP builds on the process initiated in 2002 with the Strategy for the Sustainable Development of European Aquaculture (COM(2002) 511), which set out policy directions to promote the growth of aquaculture. In 2009, the European Commission published a communication to give new impetus for building a sustainable future for aquaculture by establishing conditions and ensuring compatibility between aquaculture and the environment (COM(2009) 162). This new strategy had three key elements:
\u000aIn 2013, the Commission adopted strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture (COM(2013) 229 final) where four priority areas were identified in consultation with all relevant stakeholders:
\u000aOn the basis of these guidelines, the Commission and EU Member States will collaborate to help increase the sector's production and competitiveness under a new governance scheme. Using these guidelines, Member States have developed or are now developing multiannual national plans (MANPs) for the development of sustainable aquaculture. These MANPs outline how each Member State intends to foster growth in the aquaculture industry.
\u000aAquaculture has been identified as one of five value chains that can deliver sustainable growth and jobs in the EU's Blue Growth Strategy (COM(2012) 494 final). In addition, in July 2014, the European Parliament and the Council adopted legislation to create a common framework for maritime spatial planning in Europe (Directive 2014/89/EU). Aquaculture is considered one of the sectors that Member States will have to include in these plans in a way that responds to the sector's needs and minimises its impacts on the environment and other human activities.
\u000aInformation on the structure of the aquaculture sector and on the technologies employed is required to ensure that an environmentally sound industry is developed. Regulation (EC) No 762/2008 was established to provide detail on the statistics about the industry required and covers: (1) the annual production (volume and unit value) of aquaculture; (2) the annual input (volume and unit value) to capture-based aquaculture; (3) the annual production of hatcheries and nurseries; and (4) the structure of the aquaculture sector.
\u000aFurthermore, there is an increasing need to control the introduction of species and develop strategies to minimise or mitigate the impacts of alien species in the aquaculture sector, as described under Council Regulation (EC) No 708/2007 concerning the use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture. This regulation outlines a proposal for the regulation of alien and locally absent species by establishing a new system for the assessment and management of the risks associated with the introduction of new organisms for aquaculture. Regulation (EC) No 535/2008, which lays down detailed rules for the implementation of (EC) No 708/2007, and Regulation (EU) No 304/2011, which amends Council Regulation (EC) No 708/2007, also play a role in species introduction control and impact mitigation.
\u000aThe EC directives affecting the marketing of veterinary medicinal products also regulate aquaculture procedures. These EC directives and related regulations pertaining to the marketing of veterinary medicinal products establish maximum residue limits (MRLs) and marketing authorisations (MAs) for chemicals administered to fish.
\u000aLinked to legislative and regulatory measures, institutional measures such as codes of contact and codes of practice have been and are being established at international (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), national and aquaculture producers' association levels (Federation of European Aquaculture Producers (FEAP)) as mechanisms of self-regulation. The FEAP Code of Conduct for European Aquaculture was agreed in 2000 and contributed to the development of national codes of practice by many European aquaculture associations and was incorporated into the European Code of Sustainable and Responsible Fisheries Practices. This was adopted by the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture in 2003 (EC, 2004). International conventions also directly address the environmental impact of marine aquaculture. These conventions are the OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic; the Helsinki Convention (HELCOM) for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area; and The Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution. The most important outcome from the OSPAR system is known as PARCOM.
p1982 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1983 (dp1984 g19 Ven p1985 sg20 Nsg11 VNo specific targets exist for aquaculture. Its development should however be in line with the objectives of the WFD to reach good ecological and chemical status of all surface waters by 2015, and those of the MSFD to reach good environmental status of the marine environment by 2020.
\u000aTo stimulate aquatic production, EU Member States prepared national strategies for ambitious growth, aiming to produce an extra 300Â 000 tonnes by 2020, i.e. an increase of 25 % (Summary of the 27 Multiannual National Aquaculture Plans, European Union, 2016).
p1986 sbtp1987 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp1988 (dp1989 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fish-distribution-shifts p1990 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp1991 (dp1992 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fish-distribution-shifts/assessment-1 p1993 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1994 (dp1995 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VMAR011 p1996 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp1997 (dp1998 g19 Ven p1999 sg20 Nsg11 VChanges in fish distribution in European seas p2000 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2001 (dp2002 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre there observed changes in marine fish distribution in European seas and are they related to climate change? p2003 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2004 (dp2005 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Changes in fish distribution in European seas \u000a Over the last 45 years, an increase in the number of fish species was observed in the Celtic Sea, the Greater North Sea and the Baltic Sea. \u000a This change is mainly related to an increase in the number of warm-favouring (Lusitanian, L) species and, to a much lesser extent, an increase in the number of cool-favouring (Boreal, B) species. \u000a Observed changes are significant in the North Sea and in the Skagerrak-Kattegat, where significant correlations were also found between the L/B ratio and increased temperature, indicating that changes in fish distribution are related to climate change. \u000a In the same period, there were no observed changes in the distribution of widely distributed fish species, which are less sensitive to temperature changes but are exposed to the same combination of increased sea temperature pressures related to human activities in the assessment areas. \u000a fish species MAR MAR011 011 p2006 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2007 (dp2008 g19 Ven p2009 sg20 Nsg11 VUnited Nations Framework
\u000aThe United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 1992) was a response to global concerns that change in the Earth\u2019s climate and its adverse effects are a consequence of human activities. The convention entered into force in 1994. Currently, there are 197 Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, including the EU. The objective of the UNFCCC is \u2018to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system\u2019. The first international agreement that global temperatures should be not be allowed exceed 2 °C was accepted in 2010 (UNFCCC, 2010). The first legally binding agreement to reduce global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases and an obligation to start adapting to climate change was signed at the Paris conference in 2015 (UNFCC, 2015). Action to combat climate change and its impacts is also included in the Agenda 2030 (UN GA, 2015).
\u000aIn 2015, UN contracting parties agreed to aim to limit the increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, since this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change (EC, 2015).
\u000a\u000aThe European Commission has adopted a strategy to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU by 2020 (EC, 2011b). There are six main targets and 20 actions to help Europe reach its goal. The six targets cover: (i) full implementation of EU nature legislation to protect biodiversity, (ii) better protection for ecosystems and more use of green infrastructure, (iii) more sustainable agriculture and forestry, (iv) better management of fish stocks, (v) tighter controls on invasive alien species and (vi) a bigger EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss.
\u000aSeventh Environment Action Programme
\u000aIn November 2013, the European Parliament and the European Council adopted the Seventh EU Environment Action Programme to 2020 \u2018Living well, within the limits of our planet\u2019 (EC, 2013b). This programme is intended to help guide EU action on the environment and climate change up to and beyond 2020 based on the following vision: \u2018In 2050, we live well, within the planet\u2019s ecological limits. Our prosperity and healthy environment stem from an innovative, circular economy where nothing is wasted and where natural resources are managed sustainably, and biodiversity is protected, valued and restored in ways that enhance our society\u2019s resilience. Our low-carbon growth has long been decoupled from resource use, setting the pace for a safe and sustainable global society.\u2019
\u000a\u000aEU policies aim to achieve climate target goals as a key priority. After objectives under the Kyoto Protocol for the period 2008-2012 were achieved, the EU Adaption Strategy Package was endorsed (EC, 2013a). The Strategy (EC, 2013a) aims for a more climate-resilient system by anticipating the adverse effects of climate change and taking appropriate action to prevent and minimise the damages. As part of a framework of climate and energy policies, by 2030, the EU has committed to cut emissions in the EU territory by at least 40 % below 1990 levels. The long term targets for 2050 aim to cut EU emissions by at least 80 % compared with 1990 levels (EC, 2010; EC, 2011a). Adaptation aims to anticipate the adverse effects of climate change and take appropriate action to prevent or minimise the damage they can cause, or take advantage of opportunities that may arise (EC, 2013a). Mitigation and adaptation to climate change are built into sectoral policies in EU funds, in the biodiversity strategy (EC, 2011b; EC 2013b), in marine issues (EC, 2008; EC 2017) and in water issues (EC, 2000).
\u000aClimate change is considered in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (EC, 2008; EC 2017b) as a pressure on the marine environment, which needs to be considered in the programmes of measures as well as in the determination of good environmental status. Threshold values should be set on the basis of the precautionary principle, reflecting the potential risks to the marine environment, including climate change. One of the criteria is related to the distributional range of species, where relevant. Distribution patterns should be in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions (EC, 2017a). Environmental concerns for Arctic waters in relation to climate change may require action to ensure the environmental protection of the Arctic (EC, 2008).
p2010 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2011 (dp2012 g19 Ven p2013 sg20 Nsg11 VNot applicable
p2014 sbtp2015 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2016 (dp2017 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/oxygen-concentrations-in-coastal-and p2018 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2019 (dp2020 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/oxygen-concentrations-in-coastal-and/assessment p2021 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2022 (dp2023 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VMAR012 p2024 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2025 (dp2026 g19 Ven p2027 sg20 Nsg11 VOxygen concentrations in European coastal and marine waters p2028 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2029 (dp2030 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs the occurrence of oxygen depletion in European coastal and marine waters decreasing? p2031 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2032 (dp2033 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Oxygen concentrations in European coastal and marine waters \u000a Widespread oxygen depletion, partly due to natural conditions (stratification), occurs in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. \u000a In the Baltic Sea, oxygen concentrations in the water layer near the sea floor decreased during the period 1990-2017 at 11 % of stations, mainly in the Bothnian Bay, the Bothnian Sea, the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic Proper, and in some parts of the south-western Baltic Sea. \u000a In the Greater North Sea area, decreases in oxygen concentrations during the period 1990-2017 were observed at 9 % of stations, mainly in fjords in Denmark and along the Norwegian and Swedish Coasts and at some stations in the German Bight. \u000a Limited data were available for the Celtic Seas and the Adriatic Sea. \u000a Reduced oxygen concentrations were observed at some stations in the coastal waters of the Black Sea, but there were no significant trends in oxygen concentrations during the period 1990-2017. \u000a No significant trends in concentrations were observed for the majority of stations in all regions during the period 1990-2017. \u000a Data coverage is not sufficient in all regional seas; it is sufficient for the Baltic and the North Seas, while data for only coastal waters are available for the Adriatic and Black Seas. \u000a water marine and coastal oxygen MAR MAR012 012 p2034 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2035 (dp2036 g19 Ven p2037 sg20 Nsg11 VWith respect to eutrophication, there are a number of EU directives specifically aimed at reducing the loads and impacts of nutrients, such as the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC), the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC) and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (96/61/EEC).
\u000aThe Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC) requires the achievement of good ecological status or the good ecological potential of transitional and coastal waters across the EU and the MSDF (2008/56/EC) requires the achievement or maintenance of good environmental status in European sea basins by the year 2020. The WFD mentions dissolved oxygen concentrations as one of the physico-chemical parameters for measuring ecological status. In the MSFD, dissolved oxygen concentration in the bottom of the water column is one of the primary criteria (D5C5) for Descriptor 5 human-induced eutrophication: 'The concentration of dissolved oxygen is not reduced, due to nutrient enrichment, to levels that indicate adverse effects on benthic habitats (including on associated biota and mobile species) or other eutrophication effects.'
\u000aWith respect to climate change, the European Commission has developed the EU Adaptation Strategy with the overall aim of contributing to a more climate-resilient Europe. One of the objectives is better-informed decision-making, e.g. by sharing knowledge on (1) observed and projected climate change and its impacts on environmental and social systems and on human health, (2) relevant research, (3) EU, transnational, national and subnational adaptation strategies and plans, and (4) adaptation case studies.
p2038 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2039 (dp2040 g19 Ven p2041 sg20 Nsg11 VUnder the WFD, targets for dissolved oxygen concentrations in coastal waters have been set by Member States. Under the MSFD, threshold values for coastal waters are set in accordance with the WFD, and beyond coastal waters threshold values must be consistent with those under the WFD. Member States establish those values through (sub)regional cooperation.
p2042 sbtp2043 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2044 (dp2045 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/red-list-index-for-european-species p2046 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2047 (dp2048 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/red-list-index-for-european-species/red-list-index-for-european p2049 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2050 (dp2051 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI002 p2052 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2053 (dp2054 g19 Ven p2055 sg20 Nsg11 VRed List Index for European species p2056 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2057 (dp2058 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHas the risk of extinction for European birds changed? p2059 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2060 (dp2061 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vred-list-index-for-european Red List Index for European species To date, the Red List Index has been calculated only for bird species at a European level, so the information in the current indicator is limited to European birds. The overall risk of extinction among Europe's birds has generally been on the rise over the last decade. While the status of some species has due to conservation action, many more have deteriorated because of worsening threats and/or declining populations. extinction birds species biodiversity SEBI SEBI002 002 p2062 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2063 (dp2064 g19 Ven p2065 sg20 Nsg11 VThe RLI measures trends in the threat status (relative projected extinction risk) of European species, indicating the proportion of species expected to remain extant in the next few decades in the absence of additional conservation action. Extinction is a key measure of biodiversity loss that has resonance with the public and decision makers, and which has clear relevance to ecological processes and ecosystem function.
The main pressures affecting the trend in the RLI and biodiversity in general are:
habitat loss, unsustainable exploitation, alien invasive species, pollution and climate change. The precise drivers can be determined from the data used to generate the RLI.
There are two variants of this indicator for which the state of development is different:
(1) An RLI for European species based on global extinction risk (i.e. a European subset of the global RLI);
(2) An RLI based on regional extinction risk at either the pan-European or EU scale. Both variants of the RLI should be developed and could be presented together with appropriate interpretation. However, because of its more direct relevance to European policies, variant (2) is proposed for inclusion here.
Extinction is a naturally occurring process, but there is little doubt that humans are increasing the rate of extinctions by 100-1 000 times the historical 'background' rate. Extinction is perhaps the most fundamental form of biodiversity loss. The RLI measures trends in extinction risk for sets of species. In the European context, this indicator will provide a useful measure of the success of the implementation of the EU Birds and Habitats Directives, and the Bern Convention (particularly for threatened birds covered by Species Action Plans, which EU Member States and Convention Parties have endorsed, and thereby agreed to implement specific recovery measures).
2010 Biodiversity Target
p2070 sbtp2071 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2072 (dp2073 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/ecosystem-coverage-3 p2074 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2075 (dp2076 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/ecosystem-coverage-3/assessment p2077 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2078 (dp2079 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI004 p2080 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2081 (dp2082 g19 Ven p2083 sg20 Nsg11 VEcosystem coverage p2084 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2085 (dp2086 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat changes are occurring to the areas of Europe's ecosystems? p2087 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2088 (dp2089 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Ecosystem coverage The coverage of ecosystem classes under the EU 'Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services' (MAES) framework was affected by change processes between 2006 and 2012, with urbanisation the most dominant process. Urban ecosystems showed the highest net increase both in the EU-28 and in the EEA-39 countries, predominantly at the expense of cropland and grassland. \u000a A very slight increase in coverage was observed in forest and woodland, while agricultural ecosystems, both cropland and grassland, continued to decrease. \u000a Vulnerable ecosystems such as heathland and sparsely vegetated land (dunes, beaches, sand plains, bare rocks and glaciers) continued to disappear between 2006 and 2012, although the loss of wetlands seems to have levelled off for the first time over the same period. It should be borne in mind, however, that approximately two thirds of European wetlands were lost before the 1990s and their area has subsequently continued to decrease. urban biodiversity urbanisation land cover ecosystem land cover changes bise SEBI SEBI004 004 p2090 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2091 (dp2092 g19 Ven p2093 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator uses photo-interpretation of satellite imagery to give a rough picture of the trend in the observed area and proportion of the major ecosystems in Europe since 1990.
Satellite imagery offers the potential to characterise land cover over very large areas in an efficient and very cost effective way. It is possible to produce land cover maps from satellite imagery based on the spectral properties of each pixel within a scene. By grouping pixels into classes with similar spectral properties and associating these classes with particular land cover types, it is possible to produce maps that delineate land cover. Land cover change is then used to indicate the trends in the extent of major ecosystems such as forests, croplands, wetlands, etc. For this indicator we use data from the Corine land cover (CLC) database (CooRdinate Information on the Environment - Corine).
The CLC data are based on 44 land cover classes that are aggregated into 10 MAES ecosystem types for the purpose of this indicator. Spectral properties allow the CLC project to distinguish between land cover classes. For example, CLC has three classes showing forest land cover: broad-leaved forest, coniferous forest and mixed forest. By aggregating the information of these three land cover classes we have information on the extent of the forest ecosystem within the limitations of the CLC data (see section on main disadvantages). The CLC data however are the best available at present to cover large areas of Europe in a harmonised way.
p2094 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2095 (dp2096 g19 Ven p2097 sg20 Nsg11 VEU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 \u2014 headline target and Target 2
p2098 sbtp2099 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2100 (dp2101 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/livestock-genetic-diversity p2102 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2103 (dp2104 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/livestock-genetic-diversity/livestock-genetic-diversity-assessment-published p2105 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2106 (dp2107 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI006 p2108 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2109 (dp2110 g19 Ven p2111 sg20 Nsg11 VLivestock genetic diversity p2112 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2113 (dp2114 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2115 (dp2116 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vlivestock-genetic-diversity-assessment-published Livestock genetic diversity In several countries, populations of native breeds, although generally well adapted to local circumstances and resources, remain in critically low numbers, being replaced by a few and widespread highly productive breeds, introduced for this purpose. The fact that native breeds make up only a small part of the total population, and that a high percentage of native breeds are endangered (1) indicates a risk of loss of biodiversity. Although data are available for only a few countries, these indicate that many native cattle breeds are endangered. The situation for sheep is also problematic. Overall, the situation is stable but negative. (1) According to FAO, an endangered breed is assessed on quantitative criteria as the total number of breeding females or the overall population size and the percentage of purebred females. Here, however, each country has its own interpretation. sheep biodiversity genetic resources cattle bise agriculture species population SEBI SEBI006 006 p2117 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2118 (dp2119 g19 Ven p2120 sg20 Nsg11 VAnimal breeds constitute a pool of genetic resources of considerable potential value in a changing society and environment.
A large number of breeds which were exploited in the beginning of the 20th century are now threatened with decline due to a lack of economic interest. Their population becomes too low to ensure their viability. Simultaneously, intensification, uniformisation and modernisation of production methods have led to the selection and widespread use (thus large populations) of a small number of highly performing breeds which to a large extent can fulfill European needs for agricultural products. Many of these breeds are introduced (i.e. non-native). The widespread use of introduced cattle breeds, whose population tends to become dominant in some countries, is called the 'holsteineisation effect'.
In Europe, apart from food purposes, there is an increase in the use of animals for other goals like hobby farming and the use of animals for sports (horses). These developments also require a large variability in the genetic variation of the species used for these purposes.
While old native breeds may be less productive than highly specialised breeds, they are generally very well adapted to local circumstances and resources and may increase resilience in the long term. Considering the share of native breeds populations within each country highlights the national responsibility for conservation of the related breeds. Breeds with a low population are in general more vulnerable than those with a high population. The indicator shows the share of breeding female population between introduced and native breeds (for cattle and sheep) per country. In addition its shows the proportion of native breeds which is threatened due to low breeding female population.
Conservation of livestock breeds - among other genetic resources - is addressed:
At international level
At EU level
At national level
Many European countries have a national strategy on genetic resources.
As highlighted in the Convention on Biological Diversity, genetic diversity is one of the three components of biological diversity. Conserving genetic diversity increases resilience by maintaining breeds adapted to local circumstances.
The EU headline indicator which is considered here, only refers to species of socio-economic importance and does not address wild genetic diversity.
2010 biodiversity target
p2125 sbtp2126 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2127 (dp2128 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/critical-load-exceedance-for-nitrogen p2129 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2130 (dp2131 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/critical-load-exceedance-for-nitrogen/critical-load-exceedance-for-nitrogen p2132 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2133 (dp2134 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI009 p2135 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2136 (dp2137 g19 Ven p2138 sg20 Nsg11 VCritical load exceedance for nitrogen p2139 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2140 (dp2141 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the trends in nitrogen emissions and where in Europe does atmospheric nitrogen deposition threaten biodiversity? p2142 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2143 (dp2144 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vcritical-load-exceedance-for-nitrogen Critical load exceedance for nitrogen Nitrogen emissions and deposition of nitrogen compounds have decreased since 1990 but relatively little compared to sulphur emissions. Agriculture and transport are the main sources of nitrogen pollution (EEA, 2007c). In addition, nitrogen components can lead to eutrophication of ecosystems. When this pollution exceeds certain levels ('critical load'), it is damaging to biodiversity. Critical load exceedance is still significant (1) . (1) The critical load of nutrient nitrogen is defined as 'the highest deposition of nitrogen as NOX and/or NHY below which harmful effects in ecosystem structure and function do not occur according to present knowledge' (ICP, M&M, 2004). eutrophication eu 2020 biodiversity strategy target 3 biodiversity csi ecosystem acidification air ozone pollution nitrogen bise agriculture transport ecological status SEBI SEBI009 009 p2145 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2146 (dp2147 g19 Ven p2148 sg20 Nsg11 VThe availability of nutrients is one of the most important abiotic factors that determine plant species composition in ecosystems. Nitrogen is the limiting nutrient for plant growth in many natural and semi-natural ecosystems. Most of the plant species from oligotrophic and mesotrophic habitats are adapted to nutrient-poor conditions, and can only survive or compete successfully on soils with low nitrogen availability. High nitrogen deposition causes changes in vegetation composition and vegetation structure. These changes in turn affect the fauna composition (UNECE, 2003).
High variations in sensitivity to atmospheric nitrogen deposition have been observed between and within different natural and semi-natural ecosystems. Critical loads are used to describe this sensitivity. A critical load is defined as 'a quantitative estimate of an exposure to one or more pollutants below which significant harmful effects on specified sensitive elements of the environment do not occur according to present knowledge' (Nilsson and Grennfelt, 1988). Exceedances of critical loads by current or future nitrogen loads indicate risks for adverse effects on biodiversity.
Because of short- and long-range atmospheric transport, nitrogen (N) deposition has increased in many natural and semi-natural ecosystems across the world. The emissions of ammonia (NH3) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) strongly increased in Europe in the second half of the 20th century. Ammonia is volatilised from intensive agricultural systems, whereas nitrogen oxides originate mainly from burning of fossil fuel by traffic and industry (UNEP, 2005).
Significant geographical variability occurs in emissions and deposition of nitrogen compounds across Europe. Historically emission control strategies have focussed on reducing the emission of oxides of nitrogen. However across Europe it is now clear that nitrogen deposition is dominated by agricultural releases, predominantly ammonia. Therefore, while past effort has focussed predominately on reducing the oxides of nitrogen, future effort must also take into account reduced forms of nitrogen.
Excess nitrogen is one of the major threats to biodiversity. Excessive levels of reactive forms of nitrogen in the biosphere and atmosphere constitute a major threat to biodiversity in terrestrial, aquatic and coastal ecosystems. On land it causes loss of sensitive species and hence biodiversity by favouring a few nitrogen tolerant species over less tolerant ones. In coastal waters it leads to algal blooms and deoxygenated dead zones in which only a few bacteria may survive.
The Convention on Biological Diversity defines (2) an alien species to be 'a species, subspecies or lower taxon, introduced outside its natural past or present distribution; includes any part, gametes, seeds, eggs, or propagules of such species that might survive and subsequently reproduce' while an invasive alien species is 'an alien species whose introduction and/or spread threaten biological diversity'.
The potential threat that alien species pose to biological diversity can be illustrated in the cumulative number of alien species. Although not all alien species become invasive, the number of alien species introduced to an environment has a direct correlation with the number of species which may become invasive at a later date.
Invasive alien species may affect and reduce native biodiversity in various ways, such as through competition for food and space, predation, disease transfer, and changing habitat structure and functions. Many invasive alien species are weeds and animal pests in agriculture/aquaculture and forestry. Invasive alien micro-organisms may create severe problems to human health and to production crops. Intentionally introduced alien species for production in agriculture, forestry and fisheries/ aquaculture, horticulture or for biological control, can also become invasive, causing negative impact on native biodiversity. There is a growing concern that with climate change and further deterioration in the environment, invasive alien species may benefit and increasingly compete with native species to the latter's disadvantage.
Increase in trade and tourism and transport on land and in particular at sea, as well as developments in agriculture, plantation forestry, aquaculture, fisheries, game management and the pet trade, have provided new and enhanced pathways for the spread of invasive alien species. Although European states have a comprehensive regulatory framework to protect economic interests against diseases and pests, these are often inadequate to safeguard against species that threaten native biodiversity.
Although, over time, thousands of alien species have been introduced to Europe, most are considered more or less harmless (3) and only a relatively few genuinely problematic. There is no precise limit to draw the line between 'invasive' and 'non-invasive' alien species. Hence, it is presently impossible to compile a complete inventory of invasive alien species in Europe. The genuinely problematic ones are more easily identifiable and there are several reasons to consider those worst invasive alien species to prioritize actions and to be able to communicate the issue to a wider public (4).
(2) See http://www.biodiv.org/invasive/terms.shtml (Accessed March 2007).
(3) See e.g. http://www.gisp.org/ecology/threat.asp.
(4) The IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group has thus presented a global list of '100 of the worlds worst invasive species' with a main objective to create awareness of the wide range of invasive species from different taxonomic groups and of impacts caused, see http://www.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/2000-126.pdf.
Invasive Alien Species have been recognised as one of the major threats to biodiversity. The indicator 'Invasive alien species in Europe' covers significant aspects of the CBD/EU indicator 'Trends in invasive alien species (Numbers and costs of invasive alien species)'.
2010 biodiversity target
p2177 sbtp2178 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2179 (dp2180 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/impact-of-climate-change-on p2181 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2182 (dp2183 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/impact-of-climate-change-on/impact-of-climate-change-on p2184 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2185 (dp2186 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI011 p2187 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2188 (dp2189 g19 Ven p2190 sg20 Nsg11 VImpact of climate change on bird populations p2191 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2192 (dp2193 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the negative (and positive) impacts of climate change on biodiversity? p2194 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2195 (dp2196 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vimpact-of-climate-change-on Impact of climate change on bird populations Climate change is having a detectable effect on bird populations at a European scale, including both negative and positive effects. \u000a The number of bird species whose populations are observed to be negatively impacted by climatic change is three times larger than those observed to be positively affected by climate warming in this set of widespread European land birds. \u000a The Climatic Impact Indicator, which illustrates the impact of climate change on bird populations, has increased strongly in the past twenty years, coinciding with a period of rapid climatic warming in Europe. Potential links between changes in bird populations and ecosystem functioning and resilience are not well understood. 10 messages for 2010 biodiversity baseline climate change nature and biodiversity species bise birds SEBI SEBI011 011 p2197 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2198 (dp2199 g19 Ven p2200 sg20 Nsg11 VClimate change is having a detectable effect on bird populations at a European scale, including evidence of negative as well as positive effects on their populations.
The number of bird species observed to be negatively impacted by climatic change is three times larger than those observed to be positively affected by climate warming in this set of widespread European land birds.
The Climatic Impact Indicator (CII), which illustrates the impact of climate change on bird populations, has increased strongly in the past twenty years, coinciding with a period of rapid climatic warming in Europe.
Potential links between changes in bird populations and ecosystem functioning and resilience are not well understood. It is suggested that increasing climatic effects might alter ecosystem functioning and resilience.
p2201 sbNtp2202 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2203 (dp2204 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fragmentation-of-natural-and-semi-1 p2205 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2206 (dp2207 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fragmentation-of-natural-and-semi-1/assessment-1 p2208 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2209 (dp2210 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI013 p2211 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2212 (dp2213 g19 Ven p2214 sg20 Nsg11 VFragmentation of natural and semi-natural areas p2215 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2216 (dp2217 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre European natural/semi-natural lands becoming more fragmented? Are forest landscapes becoming more fragmented? p2218 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2219 (dp2220 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Fragmentation of natural and semi-natural areas \u000a European \u2018core natural/semi-natural\u2019 lands became more fragmented in most countries and on average between 2000 and 2006. Their 1 km 2 surroundings developed towards a \u2018mixed natural\u2019 and/or \u2018some natural\u2019 mosaic pattern with agriculture and/or artificial lands. During this time period, the loss of the core natural landscape pattern, due to the spread of artificial and/or agricultural areas, occurred particularly in parts of southern (southwestern Spain, southern Portugal, Sicily), western (Great Britain), central (western Austria) and eastern (western Romania) Europe. \u000a In 2006, 35% of European forest lands were fragmented i.e. distributed as a mixed landscape mosaic pattern where forest is intermingled with natural/semi-natural non forested lands, agriculture and artificial lands in their 1 km 2 surroundings. On average in Europe, between the years 2000 and 2006, forests in a \u2018core natural\u2019 landscape pattern became more fragmented towards a mixed landscape mosaic pattern, even if this trend was not observed for more than one third of European countries. \u000a Although more than 40% of European landscape units reported a net forest area increase during between 2000 and 2006, only in one third of the units did this gain result in a significant increase in forest connectivity. In most countries, the trend of the units in a high connectivity range was either stable or showed a decrease during this period. Landscapes with poorly connected woodlands represented more than 60% of the EU in 2006. \u000a connectivity/fragmentation of ecosystems connectivity / fragmentation of ecosystems eu 2020 biodiversity strategy target 2 bise ecosystem construction urbanisation forest landscape pattern landscape mosaic pattern connectivity biodiversity forest land cover changes green infrastructure habitat fragmentation agriculture fragmentation of ecosystems landscape land use changes SEBI SEBI013 013 p2221 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2222 (dp2223 g19 Ven p2224 sg20 Nsg11 V
The indicator is intended to address the question of ecosystem integrity by providing a measurement of 'disintegration' of the countryside across Europe.
\u000aLand use in Europe has changed substantially during the past century. The changes in land use have, in turn, affected the size of natural and semi-natural patches of land and have introduced fast growing fragmentation of the wider countryside. This indicator gives information on the trends in surface area of natural and semi natural areas at pan-European level, through the calculation of values derived from land cover maps.
\u000aLand cover maps are developed from satellite imagery based on the spectral properties of each pixel within a scene. For this indicator we use data from the Corine Land Cover database (CooRdinate Information on the Environment - Corine).
\u000aBy calculating the areas belonging to these land cover classes, information on the extent of fragmentation that has occurred in the natural and semi-natural areas is obtained, within the limitations of the CLC data (see Section on main disadvantages).
\u000aNatural and semi-natural areas represent an important integrity component of any given ecosystem, by supporting the full range of ecosystem services and the majority of species and habitats to be found in this type of ecosystem. If the size of such areas decreases, the integrity of the whole ecosystem is at risk. This in turn might affect the potential of the given ecosystem to deliver goods and services.
p2225 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2226 (dp2227 g19 Ven p2228 sg20 Nsg11 VEU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy - target 2
p2229 sbtp2230 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2231 (dp2232 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/nutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and-1 p2233 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2234 (dp2235 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/nutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and-1/nutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and p2236 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2237 (dp2238 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI015 p2239 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2240 (dp2241 g19 Ven p2242 sg20 Nsg11 VNutrients in transitional, coastal and marine waters p2243 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2244 (dp2245 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the status of transitional, marine and coastal waters in Europe? p2246 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2247 (dp2248 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vnutrients-in-transitional-coastal-and Nutrients in transitional, coastal and marine waters In countries that reported data, 85 % of stations reported no changes in oxidised nitrogen levels in transitional, coastal and marine waters in the period 1985 - 2005 and 82 % reported no change for orthophosphate. At stations that identified changes, decreases were more common than increases. oxidation orthophosphate biodiversity nitrogen SEBI SEBI015 015 p2249 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2250 (dp2251 g19 Ven p2252 sg20 Nsg11 VNitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) enrichment can result in a chain of undesirable effects, starting from excessive growth of plankton algae that increases the amount of organic matter settling to the bottom. This may be enhanced by changes in species composition and functioning of the pelagic food web (e.g. growth of small flagellates rather than larger diatoms), which leads to lower grazing by copepods and increased sedimentation. The consequent increase in oxygen consumption can, in areas with stratified water masses, lead to oxygen depletion, changes in community structure and death of the benthic fauna. Eutrophication can also increase the risk of algal blooms, some of them consisting of harmful species that cause the death of benthic fauna, wild and caged fish, or shellfish poisoning of humans. Increased growth and dominance of fast-growing filamentous macroalgae in shallow sheltered areas is another effect of nutrient overload which can change the coastal ecosystem, increase the risk of local oxygen depletion and reduce biodiversity and nurseries for fish.
Measures to reduce the adverse effects of excess anthropogenic inputs of nutrients and protect the marine environment are being taken through various initiatives at all levels - global, European, national, regional conventions and Ministerial Conferences.
There are a number of EU Directives aimed at reducing the loads and impacts of nutrients, including the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC); the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC); the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (96/61/EEC); and the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) which requires the achievement of good ecological status or good ecological potential of transitional and coastal waters across the EU by 2015.
The EU Thematic Strategy on the Protection and Conservation of the Marine Environment and its associated proposed Marine Strategy Directive are of key relevance with regards to the achievement of good environmental status in marine waters.
Additional measures arise from international initiatives and policies including: the UN Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine environment against Land-Based Activities; the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) 1975; the Helsinki Convention 1992 (HELCOM); the OSPAR Convention 1998 (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic); and the Black Sea Environmental Programme (BSEP).
Undesirable effects caused by Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) (have a direct impact on ecosystem integrity and functioning (e.g. changes in species composition, oxygen depletion, changes in community structure) and the delivery of ecosystem services (death of commercial fish species or shellfish poisoning).
Ammonium concentrations are normally raised as a result of organic pollution, caused by discharges from waste water treatment plants, industrial effluents and agricultural runoff. Ammonium exerts a demand on oxygen in water since it is transformed to oxidised forms of nitrogen. In addition, it is toxic to aquatic life at certain concentrations dependent on water temperature, salinity and pH. Background concentrations of ammonium are around 15 Îĵg/l (as N) (Meybeck, 1982, quoted in EEA, 1999).
\u000aBOD is a key indicator of the oxygenation status of water bodies. BOD is the oxygen demand brought about by organisms in water and sediment acting on oxidisable organic matter. In most European countries, the BOD5 test is used where oxygen consumption is measured after five days incubation under controlled conditions. In other, mainly northern Europe countries, the BOD7 test is used where samples are incubated for seven days. High BOD is usually a result of organic pollution, caused by discharges from wastewater treatment plants, industrial effluents and agricultural runoff. A high BOD has several effects on the aquatic environment including reducing river water chemical and biological quality, reducing the biodiversity of aquatic communities and reducing the microbiological quality of waters. Background levels are difficult to quantify and are likely to be at or below the detection limit of the analytical method used, i.e. between 1 and 2 mg O2/l.
\u000aLarge inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus to water bodies can lead to eutrophication causing ecological changes that result in a loss of plant and animal species (reduction in biodiversity and ecological status), and have negative impacts on the use of water for human consumption and other purposes.
\u000aThere are a number of EU Directives aimed at reducing the loads and impacts of organic matter. These include:
\u000a\u000a
Ecological status and potential, as reported in the first river basin management plans, are related to the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The WFD came into force on 22 December 2000, and according to the directive, the first river basin management plans should be published, at the latest, nine years after the directive entered into force. There are, however, serious delays in some parts of the EU and in some Member States consultations are still on-going.
\u000aThe indicator is directly linked to the objective of the WFD. The main objective of the WFD states that all surface waters should be in good or high ecological status or potential by 2015, or 15 years after entry into force of the directive. The indicator shows the number of water bodies where management measures are needed, and for which water categories and in which regions the need for measures is highest.
\u000aAmmonium, BOD, N and P concentrations indicate water quality. If concentrations are high, quality goes down, threatening aquatic biodiversity and reducing the integrity of the ecosystem and its capacity to deliver ecosystem services.
\u000aEnrichment of water bodies with organic matter can lead to oxygen depletion and changes in the trophic structure and functioning of aquatic ecosystems. Until the WFD establishes reference conditions and good status for water bodies - including for water bodies impacted by organic matter discharges, type-specific concentrations equivalent to good ecological status - it will not be possible to relate the indicator to specific impacts on ecological status or biodiversity. However, with decreasing concentrations of oxygen consuming substances and nutrient concentrations it can be assumed in general that the water quality of water bodies is improving and by association aquatic life will benefit.
\u000ap2277 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2278 (dp2279 g19 Ven p2280 sg20 Nsg11 V
The indicator is not directly related to a specific policy target but shows the efficiency of wastewater treatment (see CSI024). The environmental quality of surface waters with respect to organic pollution and ammonium and the reduction of the loads and impacts of these pollutants are, however, objectives of several directives, including the Surface Water for Drinking Directive (75/440/EEC), which sets standards for the BOD and ammonium content of drinking water, as well as other directives mentioned in the previous chapter.
p2281 sbtp2282 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2283 (dp2284 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-growing-stock-increment-and-fellings-3 p2285 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2286 (dp2287 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-growing-stock-increment-and-fellings-3/assessment p2288 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2289 (dp2290 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI017 p2291 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2292 (dp2293 g19 Ven p2294 sg20 Nsg11 VForest: growing stock, increment and fellings p2295 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2296 (dp2297 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs forestry in Europe sustainable in terms of the balance between the increment of growing stock and fellings? p2298 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2299 (dp2300 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Forest: growing stock, increment and fellings The ratio of forest fellings to increment is relatively stable and remains under 80 % for most countries across Europe. This utilisation rate has allowed Europe's forest stock to continue to increase. \u000a The average growing stock density in European forests is 163 m 3 per hectare. While this varies considerably between countries, high individual values can be mainly put down to ecological conditions that favour tree growth, the protection of forest areas and, locally, forest harvesting difficulties. \u000a \u000a biodiversity growing stock ecosystem forests biomass forestry sustainable use forest increment bise felling SEBI SEBI017 017 p2301 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2302 (dp2303 g19 Ven p2304 sg20 Nsg11 VGrowing stock is one of the basic statistics of any forest inventory and is useful for various purposes. The standing volume of growing stock can be converted into estimates of above and below-ground woody biomass by applying biomass expansion factors. Data on growing stock, increment and fellings are crucial for the calculation of carbon budgets in the forest sector.
\u000aThe balance between increment and fellings highlights the sustainability of timber production over time as well as the current availability and the potential for future availability of timber. For long-term sustainability, the annual fellings must not exceed the net annual increment, agreed to be less than 70 % over the long term.
\u000aAn increase in growing stock relative to forest area is an indication of a maturing forest. The balance between growth and fellings in production forests is the best indicator to understand the forest's potential for wood production, and the conditions it provides for biodiversity, health, recreation and other forest functions.
p2305 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2306 (dp2307 g19 Ven p2308 sg20 Nsg11 VEU 2020 biodiversity target 3
p2309 sbtp2310 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2311 (dp2312 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-deadwood-1 p2313 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2314 (dp2315 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-deadwood-1/assessment-1 p2316 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2317 (dp2318 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI018 p2319 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2320 (dp2321 g19 Ven p2322 sg20 Nsg11 VForest: deadwood p2323 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2324 (dp2325 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat is the trend in the amount of deadwood in Europe\u2019s forests? p2326 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2327 (dp2328 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-1 Forest: deadwood Since 2000, an overall increase of deadwood has been observed in several countries, a sign of more biodiversity-friendly management practices, but also of large disturbances such as storms. eu 2020 biodiversity strategy target 3 biodiversity ecosystem nature and biodiversity deadwood biomass sustainable forest management forestry forest bise ecological status SEBI SEBI018 018 p2329 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2330 (dp2331 g19 Ven p2332 sg20 Nsg11 VDeadwood (coarse woody debris) in the form of snags (dead standing trees) and logs (dead lying trees) is a habitat for a wide array of organisms and, after humification, an important component of forest soil. During some parts of their life cycle, some species are dependent on finding a place to live either on the surface or in the cavities/protected places of dead or dying wood of moribund or dead trees (standing and fallen), or upon wood-inhabiting fungi or other species. Because of a lack of deadwood in multipurpose forests, many of the species dependent on deadwood are endangered.
\u000aAt present it is still debated what amount of deadwood is required in order to maintain the most valuable species and under what circumstances the accumulated deadwood component may give rise to a risk for insect outbreaks.
\u000aDecaying wood habitats are important components of biodiversity in European forests and recognised as an indicator for assessing and monitoring biodiversity as well as sustainable forest management.
p2333 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2334 (dp2335 g19 Ven p2336 sg20 Nsg11 V2020 EU biodiversity targets - target 3: Increase the contribution of agriculture and forestry to biodiversity
...........................
a. High nature value farmland area
\u000aHigh nature value farmland areas mostly coincide with traditional or extensive agricultural systems. They have one or more of following characteristics:
\u000aLoss of high nature value farmland is a result of intensification, abandonment and urbanisation.
\u000ab. Area under organic farming
\u000aBy caring for the whole system, organic farming generally favours biodiversity (Hole et al. 2005), though more productive farming systems may also support opportunities for biodiversity.
\u000aRecent literature reviews provide more information on the environmental impacts of organic agriculture compared with conventional management systems. The results are not always unambiguous: the environmental benefits of organic farming are most clearly documented for biodiversity and for water and soil conservation, but there is no clear evidence of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Organic agriculture is likely to have a more positive environmental impact in areas with highly intensive agriculture than in areas with low input farming systems. The regional uptake of organic farming has so far been concentrated in extensive grassland regions where fewer changes are needed to convert to organic farming than in regions dominated by intensive, arable farming, where the benefits would be greater (EEA 2005).
\u000aÂ
\u000aThe area of High Nature Value farmland indicates an area that, historically, has been managed at low intensity and not been converted to intensive farming. This area represents important biodiversity in agricultural systems.
\u000aOrganic farming, which may be low or high intensity, is contributing to sustainable management in that it does not negatively impact on systems outside the area under organic farming, and although it does not necessarily benefit above ground biodiversity, it does benefit soil biodiversity in comparison with intensive agriculture.
p2361 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2362 (dp2363 g19 Ven p2364 sg20 Nsg11 VEU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy - target 3
p2365 sbtp2366 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2367 (dp2368 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/aquaculture-effluent-water-quality-from p2369 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2370 (dp2371 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/aquaculture-effluent-water-quality-from/aquaculture-effluent-water-quality-from p2372 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2373 (dp2374 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI022 p2375 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2376 (dp2377 g19 Ven p2378 sg20 Nsg11 VAquaculture: effluent water quality from finfish farms p2379 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2380 (dp2381 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWhat are the main trends in aquaculture across Europe? p2382 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2383 (dp2384 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vaquaculture-effluent-water-quality-from Aquaculture: effluent water quality from finfish farms Aquaculture production in Europe has increased in the EU since 1990, levelling off slightly since 2000 although Norway and Iceland continue to show large increases. This overall increase implies a rise in pressure on adjacent water bodies and associated ecosystems resulting mainly from nutrient releasefrom aquaculture facilities. Annual production in the current version of the indicator is a proxy for the environmental impacts of aquaculture. Work is underway to develop a more advanced indicator to assess the sustainability of aquaculture. fisheries biodiversity aquaculture SEBI SEBI022 022 p2385 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2386 (dp2387 g19 Ven p2388 sg20 Nsg11 VThe importance of aquaculture as a source of fish protein in the EU is increasing. In 2004 aquaculture contributed almost 19 % to the total fisheries production of EU-25 an increase of nearly 2 % over the situation in 2000. However, this was not due to an increase in aquaculture production, which has remained relatively stable since 2000, but due primarily to a decrease of nearly 10 % in the total fisheries production. One of the goals of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is to take measures to mitigate the impact of aquaculture on the environment.
In general, effluent water quality is determined by the concentration of nutrients in the discharge water and hence by the amount of nutrients produced that will be discharged, and the flow rate of the effluent. In the case of aquaculture the production of nutrients that will be discharged in the marine environment is determined.
Aquaculture typically takes place in water of high quality. The principal measurable environmental pressures of aquaculture production are increased local organic matter, nitrogen and phosphorous which in turn may lead to locally increased Biological Oxygen Demand, eutrophication, and possibly algal blooms. In the absence of major improvements in industry practices, increased production is likely to be associated with increases in all these pressures and thus unsustainability (NB: some local systems may however have a higher carrying capacity than others).
Any localised degradation will lead to production problems on farms. Pressure from nutrients from intensive cultivation in marine and brackish water is becoming significant in the context of total nutrient loadings to the coastal environment. Although the environmental pressure from aquaculture will continue to grow as European aquaculture production expands, the rate of increase may be mitigated substantially by adoption of more sustainable management practices and production techniques.
This indicator provides a quantitative assessment of global and local overshoots, i.e. the extent to which humanity's footprint, or demand for ecosystem resources, exceeds biocapacity and the planet's ability to regenerate these resources. The global overshoot means that ecosystem stocks are being liquidated and untreated wastes are accumulating in the biosphere. While it is not known precisely how long various ecosystems can tolerate this growing ecological deficit, it is predicted that the increasing pressure will eventually contribute to ecosystem degradation or failure.
\u000aNational ecological footprint accounting provides a number of key indicators such as the footprint of consumption, the footprint of production and the biocapacity of a nation. Hence, it can provide assessments of aspects such as (1) Europe's demands on land and sea areas within its own borders; (2) Europe's demands on the land and sea areas outside its borders; and (3) Europe's demand on specific ecosystem types. Although the aggregate consumption of material resources by European households is more than double the available biocapacity within Europe, Europe's domestic extraction of biological resources is still below Europe's total biocapacity as a result of imports from other regions and has remained at about the same level in recent years.
\u000aThe 'ecological footprint of European countries' (i.e. the consumption footprint) directly measures Europe's resource use compared with what is available globally. In other words, it shows to what extent the level of consumption is replicable on a global scale. It can also be used to measure local extraction rates. This means that ecological footprint accounting can provide information on global and local sustainability.
p2413 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2414 (dp2415 g19 Ven p2416 sg20 Nsg11 V2020 EU biodiversity targets: Target 6
p2417 sbtp2418 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2419 (dp2420 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/financing-biodiversity-management p2421 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2422 (dp2423 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/financing-biodiversity-management/financing-biodiversity-management-assessment-published p2424 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2425 (dp2426 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VSEBI025 p2427 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2428 (dp2429 g19 Ven p2430 sg20 Nsg11 VFinancing biodiversity management p2431 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2432 (dp2433 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow much public funds are being committed to conservation of biodiversity? p2434 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2435 (dp2436 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vfinancing-biodiversity-management-assessment-published Financing biodiversity management This indicator currently has a limited scope and only contains information from EU funding of projects using the LIFE financial instrument for the environment. The amount of the EU contribution per LIFE project varies significantly among Member States. Newer Member States tend to spend less money through the LIFE Nature programme (with a small number of notable exceptions). Further detail is required (e.g. on project size) in order to interpret these figures. The LIFE Nature project represents a very small proportion of the total EU budget. European funding benefiting biodiversity may also be 'hidden' in budget lines within other policy areas, such as agriculture, rural development and research. Finally, the indicator currently does not show national funding for biodiversity. financing biodiversity expenditures financing biodiversity life nature and biodiversity projects bise SEBI SEBI025 025 p2437 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2438 (dp2439 g19 Ven p2440 sg20 Nsg11 VThe purpose of the indicator for financing biodiversity management is to obtain a value that embraces both what has been done in favour of biodiversity as well as what that has not been done, the latter in order to avoid damage to biodiversity. Considering what has not been done refers, inter alia, to the legislation that specifically prohibits action, and that subsequently may entail income foregone for a party thus constrained. To simplify, these two categories of action are addressed separately.
Actions to maintain and enhance biodiversity
The expenditure that is normally considered as beneficial for biodiversity should:
1. add to the territory that is reserved for nature conservation;
2. manage the territory that has been set aside for nature conservation;
3. promote conservation measures to maintain and restore nature generally, including research;
4. protect the diurnal or seasonal migration pathways for species;
5. regulate land use, when the corresponding impacts are positive for the state of biodiversity.
Actions to protect and restore biodiversity
The expenditure that is associated with avoiding (continued) harm to biodiversity should:
1. compensate for past or future disruption to the state of natural habitats;
2. reintroduce species in a habitat where their numbers have declined below a satisfactory level for maintaining a viable population or community;
3. forbid certain uses of biodiversity (notably species capture - in all manners - or harvesting);
4. monitor species population levels and area of natural habitat;
5. regulate land use, when the corresponding impacts would have been negative for the state of biodiversity; these include cross-compliance measures applied to agricultural (and forestry) practices.
Income foregone as a result of any of the above circumstances is also a value that has to be included in the calculation, as far as this is compensated from the EU budget.
Within the EU budget, the appropriate budget lines are:
Title 05 -- agriculture
05 04 01 07 -- agri-environment (former system)
05 04 01 08 -- agri-environment (new system)
Title 07 -- environment
07 03 03 01 -- LIFE III (nature protection)
07 03 03 02 -- Natura 2000 preparatory action
Biodiversity funding at the EU level is an indication of the relative and absolute degree of resource transfer from the public sector for the benefit of maintaining or enhancing the state of biodiversity, or to avoid damage and disruption to ecological conditions.
Public opinion is a vital factor in influencing politicians and decision makers. It provides a barometer for public support and interest, and motivates individuals at all levels to lead and take more action. The purpose of this indicator on public opinion is, therefore, to gauge the attitude of the general public in relation to issues such as:
\u000aPublic opinion is an indication of attitudes towards biodiversity per se and attitudes towards actions taken by politicians and public bodies for the protection and management (financial and fiscal, public statements, etc.) of biodiversity.
p2465 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2466 (dp2467 g19 Ven p2468 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator provides a general contribution to the EU 2020 headline biodiversity target.
p2469 sbtp2470 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2471 (dp2472 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-final-energy-consumption-by-mode p2473 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2474 (dp2475 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-final-energy-consumption-by-mode/assessment-10 p2476 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2477 (dp2478 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM001 p2479 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2480 (dp2481 g19 Ven p2482 sg20 Nsg11 VFinal energy consumption in Europe by mode of transport p2483 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2484 (dp2485 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs total energy consumption in transport increasing in Europe? p2486 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2487 (dp2488 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-10 Final energy consumption in Europe by mode of transport \u000a Annual energy consumption in transport in the EEA-33 grew by 38 % between 1990 and 2007 (32 % in EU-28). However, the economic recession caused a decline in transport demand, leading to a 3 % decrease in the related energy demand in the last decade. \u000a The shipping sector saw the greatest decline of 10 % in energy consumption between 2008 and 2009 alone, with a total decrease of 19 % between 2007 and 2017, while energy use in air transport increased by 7 % between 2007 and 2017. \u000a Road transport accounts for the largest proportion of energy consumption in the transport sector, accounting for 73 % of the total demand in 2017. It was still 34 % higher in 2017 than in 1990. \u000a term001 energy energy statistics energy cosumption transport TERM TERM001 001 p2489 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2490 (dp2491 g19 Ven p2492 sg20 Nsg11 VReductions in fuel consumption in the transport sector, and/or reductions of related impacts, may be achieved via three primary means:
\u000aAlthough climate policy and the Kyoto Protocol are important drivers of reducing fossil fuel consumption (and air quality policy to a lesser extent), this indicator is primarily concerned with energy policy. Other related issues are addressed in TERM002 (Greenhouse gas emissions from transport in Europe), TERM003 (Emissions of air pollutants from transport) and TERM031 (Use of renewable fuels in transport in Europe).
p2493 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2494 (dp2495 g19 Ven p2496 sg20 Nsg11 VThe EU has set itself the following targets:
\u000aIf the 2030 policy framework, proposed in January 2014, is accepted, these targets will be built upon. Additional targets \u2014 which aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 % by 2030 and increase the proportion of energy that is renewable by at least 27 %, also by 2030 \u2014 will be set. Improvements in energy efficiency are still encouraged (as part of the '20-20-20' target to increase energy efficiency by 20 % by 2020), but no new target has been proposed (EC, 2014).
\u000aTwo key documents published by the European Commission in 2011 outline possible strategies for the transport sector, which are compatible with the 2050 target. These are the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050 (EC, 2011) and the third decennial Transport White Paper, Roadmap to a single European transport area \u2014 Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system (EC, 2011).
\u000aThe impact assessment that accompanied the 2011 Transport White Paper (EC, 2011) suggests that a 70 % reduction in oil consumption in transport from 2008 levels should be achieved by 2050.
p2497 sbtp2498 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2499 (dp2500 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases-7 p2501 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2502 (dp2503 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases-7/assessment p2504 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2505 (dp2506 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM002 p2507 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2508 (dp2509 g19 Ven p2510 sg20 Nsg11 VGreenhouse gas emissions from transport in Europe p2511 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2512 (dp2513 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 V sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2514 (dp2515 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Greenhouse gas emissions from transport in Europe Greenhouse gas emissions from the EU\u2019s transport increased in 2018 and 2019 and have not followed the EU\u2019s general decreasing emissions trend. National projections compiled by the EEA suggest that transport emissions in 2030 will remain above 1990 levels, even with measures currently planned in Member States. Further action is needed particularly in road transport, the highest contributor to transport emissions, as well as aviation and shipping, where transport demand is driving emissions upward in both absolute and relative terms. projections transport emissions TERM TERM002 002 p2516 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2517 (dp2518 g19 Ven p2519 sg20 Nsg11 VThe European Green Deal (COM(2019) 640 final) sets out the aim to achieve a carbon neutral EU by 2050. This requires the decarbonisation of all sectors. In its proposal for the Climate Law (COM(2020) 80 final), the European Commission proposed to increase the intermediate GHG emission reduction target for 2030 to 55 %, accepted by the European Council at the end of 2020.
\u000aIn December 2020, the Commission published \u2018Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy\u2019 (COM(2020) 789 final), laying out its vision to ensure that the EU transport system can achieve a green transformation.
\u000aThe transport sector is responsible for nearly a quarter of Europe\u2019s greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, this sector has proven difficult to decarbonise, and has not shown the same decreases in GHG emissions since 1990 as other sectors. Therefore, it is important to track this sector in detail and project changes in GHG emissions based on the reductions possible with policy measures that have already been adopted or are planned in the EU Member States.
\u000aIn the implementation of the 2030 climate and energy framework, commercial aviation (all airlines operating in Europe) is covered by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, while the rest of the transport sector (excluding international shipping) is covered by the Effort Sharing Regulation. The indicator allows the contributions of the transport sector to meeting targets set out in both these pieces of legislation to be assessed in detail.
p2520 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2521 (dp2522 g19 Ven p2523 sg20 Nsg11 VTargets not defined for this indicator
p2524 sbtp2525 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2526 (dp2527 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-air-pollutants-8 p2528 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2529 (dp2530 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-air-pollutants-8/transport-emissions-of-air-pollutants-8 p2531 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2532 (dp2533 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM003 p2534 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2535 (dp2536 g19 Ven p2537 sg20 Nsg11 VEmissions of air pollutants from transport p2538 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2539 (dp2540 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre emissions of acidifying substances, particulates and ozone precursors from transport decreasing? p2541 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2542 (dp2543 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vtransport-emissions-of-air-pollutants-8 Emissions of air pollutants from transport \u000a Between 1990 and 2017, the transport sector significantly reduced emissions of the following air pollutants: carbon monoxide and non-methane volatile organic compounds (both by around 87 %), sulphur oxides (66 %) and nitrogen oxides (40 %). Since 2000, a reduction in particulate matter emissions (44 % for PM 2.5 and 35 % for PM 10 ) has occurred. \u000a Emissions from road transport have declined less than was anticipated over the last two decades and continue to decrease (except emissions of sulphur oxides in recent years). In 2017, emissions were lower than in the previous year: emissions of nitrogen oxides decreased by 3 % and those of carbon monoxide by 3.2 %, those of PM 10 and PM 2.5 decreased by 1.4 % and 3.6 %, respectively. Emissions of sulphur oxides increased by 2.7 % in 2017, compared with 2016, but it is still less than 1 % of what have been emitted in 1990. \u000a Emissions of air pollutants have decreased for all transport modes since 1990, except for shipping, for which nitrogen oxide emissions have increased, and aviation, for which emissions of all pollutants (except non-methane volatile organic compounds) have increased. \u000a air pollutant emissions transport emissions air emissions air pollution TERM TERM003 003 p2544 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2545 (dp2546 g19 Ven p2547 sg20 Nsg11 VDirective 2008/50/EC (EC, 2008) sets limit values for the atmospheric concentrations of the main pollutants, including sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), airborne PM (PM10 and PM2.5), lead, CO, benzene and ozone (O3) for EU Member States. These limits are related to transport implicitly, but the introduction of progressively stricter Euro emissions standards and fuel quality standards has led to substantial reductions in air pollutant emissions. Policies aimed at reducing fuel consumption in the transport sector, to cut greenhouse gas emissions, may also help to further reduce air pollutant emissions.
\u000aIceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey are not members of the EU and hence have no emission ceilings set under the revised National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD), Directive (EU) 2016/2284. As well as most of the EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland have ratified the 1999 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) Gothenburg Protocol, which required them to reduce their emissions to the agreed ceiling, specified in the protocol, by 2010. Liechtenstein has also signed, but has not ratified, the protocol.
p2548 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2549 (dp2550 g19 Ven p2551 sg20 Nsg11 VBoth the NECD and the Gothenburg Protocol set reduction targets for SO2, NOx, NMVOCs and NH3 for the EEA-33 member countries. There are substantial differences in emission ceilings and, hence, emission reduction percentages for different countries, due to the different sensitivities of the ecosystems affected and the technical feasibility of making reductions.
p2552 sbtp2553 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2554 (dp2555 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exceedances-of-air-quality-objectives-7 p2556 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2557 (dp2558 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/exceedances-of-air-quality-objectives-7/assessment-2 p2559 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2560 (dp2561 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM004 p2562 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2563 (dp2564 g19 Ven p2565 sg20 Nsg11 VExceedances of air quality limit values due to traffic p2566 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2567 (dp2568 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs air pollution from the transport sector decreasing in Europe? p2569 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2570 (dp2571 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-2 Exceedances of air quality limit values due to traffic \u000a \u000a The annual EU limit value for nitrogen dioxide \u2014 one of the main air quality pollutants of concern, which is typically associated with vehicle emissions \u2014 was widely exceeded across Europe in 2017. Some 86 % o f these exceedances were detected at roadside monitoring locations. \u000a The EU limit values for the two categories of particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) were also widely exceeded in 2017. For PM 2.5 , the percentage of exceedances recorded at traffic stations was very similar to that recorded at background stations. For PM 10 , a higher percentage of exceedances was recorded at background stations than at traffic stations. This indicates the importance of other emission sources for these pollutants, such as commercial and institutional buildings, household heating, etc. \u000a \u000a pm10 transport air pollution TERM TERM004 004 p2572 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2573 (dp2574 g19 Ven p2575 sg20 Nsg11 VThis indicator provides information relevant to current European air quality legislation related to the setting of national emissions targets, the reduction of transport-related emissions (discussed in detail in TERM003 (EEA, 2018b)) and the protection of human health from harmful air pollutant levels (EU, 2008). It is related to the World Health Organization's (WHO's) Air Quality Guidelines (WHO, 2000, 2006) for protecting public health.
p2576 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2577 (dp2578 g19 Ven p2579 sg20 Nsg11 VEU ambient air quality limit values set by Directive 2008/50/EC for the protection of human health
\u000aWHO Air Quality Guidelines
\u000aIn 1995, the European Commission adopted a Community strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and improve fuel economy. The strategy was based on the following pillars:
\u000aIn 1998, a voluntary agreement was reached between the European Commission and the European Automobile Manufacturers' Association (ACEA) to reduce average emissions from new cars sold to 140 g CO2/km by 2008. Voluntary commitments from Japanese and Korean manufacturers set a target of 140 g CO2/km by 2009.
\u000aIn February 2007, the Commission adopted a Communication on the results of the review of the Community Strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light-commercial vehicles. It acknowledged that progress went some way towards a target of 140 g CO2/km, but highlighted that the EU objective of 120 g CO2/km would not be met by 2012 in the absence of additional measures.
\u000aTherefore, the European Commission decided to establish CO2 emission performance requirements for new passenger cars in 2009. A similar approach was established for new light commercial vehicles in 2011.
\u000aOn 19 April 2019, the European Parliament and the Council adopted a regulation that established CO2 emission performance requirements for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles (vans) in the European Union post-2020.
p2603 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2604 (dp2605 g19 Ven p2606 sg20 Nsg11 VFor new passenger cars, Regulation (EU) No 443/2009 sets the average CO2 specific emission target at 130 g CO2/km by 2015. This is defined as the average value for the fleet of newly registered passenger cars in the EU. A target of 95 g CO2/km was set for 2021 (phase-in from 2020).
\u000aFor new light commercial vehicles, Regulation (EU) No 510/2011 sets the average CO2 emissions target at 175 g CO2/km by 2017. This is defined as the average value for the fleet of newly registered vans in the EU. A medium-term target of 147 g CO2/km was set for 2020.
p2607 sbtp2608 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2609 (dp2610 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/infrastructure-investments p2611 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2612 (dp2613 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/infrastructure-investments/assessment-3 p2614 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2615 (dp2616 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM019 p2617 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2618 (dp2619 g19 Ven p2620 sg20 Nsg11 VInvestment in transport infrastructure p2621 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2622 (dp2623 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs investment in environmentally friendly transport systems being prioritised? | What is the GDP share of infrastructure investment by transport mode in the EEA Member Countries? p2624 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2625 (dp2626 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-3 Investment in transport infrastructure \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a Since the mid-1990s, spending on transport infrastructure has increased significantly across the EEA-33 member countries, reaching a peak in 2009. It has subsequently decreased each year. Despite these reductions, in 2014, the level of spending was 8 % higher than in 1995. \u000a The share of road transport investment has decreased from a high of 61 % in 1995 to a 52 % share of total investment in 2014. Rail investments comprised a 37 % share in 2014, a larger fraction than in 1995 when the figure was less than 27 %. Infrastructure spending on other transport modes has remained broadly constant. \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a \u000a TERM TERM019 019 p2627 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2628 (dp2629 g19 Ven p2630 sg20 Nsg11 VTraditionally, EU transport policy has been concerned with providing transport infrastructure and services to support the development of the internal market and ensure the proper functioning of the Community\u2019s transport systems. Transport infrastructure investment is also seen as important in reducing disparities between regions.
\u000aDuring past decades, transport investment policies focused on extending infrastructure capacity, particularly roads, as a response to increasing traffic demand. However, there is strong evidence that new transport infrastructure, again particularly roads, generates new demand for travel, and often serves simply to shift congestion problems from one place or point in time to another.
\u000aAs of January 2014, the European Union has a new transport infrastructure policy that connects the continent between East and West, and North and South. This policy aims to close the gaps between Member States' transport networks, remove bottlenecks that still hamper the smooth functioning of the internal market and overcome technical barriers such as incompatible standards for railway traffic. It promotes and strengthens seamless transport chains for passengers and freight.
\u000aAs an EU policy, the trans-European networks (TENs) \u2013 in transport, energy and telecommunication \u2013 have existed since 1993. The new TEN-T (transport) guidelines (Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013) clearly state the essence of the policy:
\u000aThe planning, development and operation of trans-European transport networks contributes to the attainment of major EU objectives \u2014 as set out in, inter alia, the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Commission White Paper entitled "Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area \u2013 Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system" ("the White Paper") \u2014 such as the smooth functioning of the internal market and the strengthening of economic, social and territorial cohesion. Their specific objectives also include allowing the seamless, safe and sustainable mobility of persons and goods, ensuring accessibility and connectivity for all regions of the EU, and contributing to further economic growth and competitiveness in a global perspective. These specific objectives should be achieved by establishing interconnections and interoperability between national transport networks in a resource-efficient and sustainable way. For example, rail interoperability could be enhanced by innovative solutions aimed at improving compatibility between systems, such as on-board equipment and multi-gauge rail tracks.
\u000aGrowth in traffic has resulted in increased congestion in international transport. In order to ensure the international mobility of passengers and goods, the capacity of the TEN-T and the use of that capacity should be optimised and, where necessary expanded. This should be done by removing infrastructure bottlenecks and bridging missing infrastructure links within and between Member States and, as appropriate, neighbouring countries, and taking into account ongoing negotiations with candidate and potential candidate countries.
\u000aAs stated in the White Paper, the efficiency and effectiveness of transport can be significantly enhanced by ensuring a better modal integration across the network, in terms of infrastructure, information flows and procedures.
p2631 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2632 (dp2633 g19 Ven p2634 sg20 Nsg11 VThere are general targets for investments enabling a modal shift to more environmentally friendly transport modes such as rail, waterways and sea transport. Targets also exist for investments enabling an integrated TEN-T.
\u000aThe European Commission published a Transport White Paper in March 2011 (European Commission, 2011), which includes a number of objectives and targets for transport. In particular, there are a number of objectives aimed at \u2018Optimising the performance of multi-modal logistic chains, including by making greater use of more energy-efficient modes\u2019, which will, in most cases, have a direct impact on transport infrastructure investment and capacity. These include:
\u000aAccording to the latest TEN-T guidelines, EU transport policy objectives should be achieved by establishing interconnections and interoperability between national transport networks in a resource-efficient and sustainable way.
p2635 sbtp2636 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2637 (dp2638 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/real-change-in-transport-prices p2639 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2640 (dp2641 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/real-change-in-transport-prices/assessment-2 p2642 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2643 (dp2644 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM020 p2645 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2646 (dp2647 g19 Ven p2648 sg20 Nsg11 VReal change in transport prices by mode p2649 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2650 (dp2651 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre freight transport prices increasing in Europe? | Are passenger transport prices increasing at a higher rate than consumer prices in Europe? p2652 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2653 (dp2654 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-2 Real change in transport prices by mode \u000a The price of purchasing cars has decreased significantly since 1996, relative to average consumer prices. In contrast, the prices of passenger services and the operation of personal transport equipment have generally increased. \u000a The volatility of the transport market is apparent from figures for 2009, when overall transport prices fell at a faster rate than average consumer prices. This was primarily because of a significant drop in the average crude oil price between 2008 and 2009, and subsequent reductions in fuel prices. \u000a Rail transport prices are less closely tied to fuel prices, as most services operate under \u2018public service obligations\u2019 and an increasing proportion of passenger rail transport is electric. \u000a Overall, transport prices appear to have peaked in 2012, largely driven by a peak in the price of operating personal transport equipment. \u000a transport prices TERM TERM020 020 p2655 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2656 (dp2657 g19 Ven p2658 sg20 Nsg11 VAccording to the 2011 Transport White Paper, 30 % of road freight transported over more than 300 km should be transported by other modes of transport, such as rail or water transport, by 2030, and more than 50 % should be transported by other modes of transport by 2050. As for passenger transport, most medium-distance passenger transport should be by rail by 2050. Given the significant growth predicted in transport demand, further measures are needed to achieve these aims.
\u000aThe cost of transport reflects market changes such as vehicle technology developments, international energy price evolution and state interventions through regulations, subsidies and taxation (see TERM021). Government actions can internalise the environmental externalities of different modes of transport, which can lead to users to shift between modes of transport. This indicator, which monitors transport prices by mode, can be used to monitor the development of economic incentives for shifts in the modes of transport used (TERM020).
p2659 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2660 (dp2661 g19 Ven p2662 sg20 Nsg11 VNo targets currently exist for transport user prices in the (liberalised) transport market. However, by applying fair and efficient pricing, the balance between transport modes may be affected, since the level of externalities and room for improvement may differ between modes. The 2011 Transport White Paper highlights the need to further promote the attractiveness of non-road modes of transport through a two-pronged strategy: first, to confront all modes with their full costs (including the costs of negative externalities), and, second, to directly improve the market conditions for non-road modes of transport.
p2663 sbtp2664 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2665 (dp2666 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fuel-prices-and-taxes p2667 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2668 (dp2669 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/fuel-prices-and-taxes/assessment-4 p2670 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2671 (dp2672 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM021 p2673 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2674 (dp2675 g19 Ven p2676 sg20 Nsg11 VTransport fuel prices and taxes in Europe p2677 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2678 (dp2679 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VDo fuel prices affect pressures on the environment? p2680 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2681 (dp2682 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment-4 Transport fuel prices and taxes in Europe \u000a The price of fuel is an important determinant of the demand for transport and the efficiency with which fuel is used. However, despite a slight increase in real prices over the last two decades, transport demand has increased even more. \u000a Since 1980, the 'real' price (including taxes) of transport fuel has fluctuated between EUR 0.75 and EUR 1.51 per litre, with an average price of EUR 1.15. Real prices per litre peaked in July 2008, reaching EUR 1.24, but then fell by around one third later that year, largely due to a significant drop in the price of crude oil. Another peak occurred in August 2012, when fuel prices reached EUR 1.25. Since then fuel prices have fallen again, reaching a low of EUR 0.84 in February 2016. The first eight months of 2018 show an increasing trend. The average real price in April 2018 was EUR 1.23 per litre. \u000a The price of transport fuel without taxes follows a similar trend; since 1980, it has fluctuated between EUR 0.21 and EUR 0.78 per litre, with an average price of EUR 0.45. Real prices per litre peaked in June 2008, but then fell by around one third later that year, largely because of a significant drop in the price of crude oil. Another peak occurred in September 2012, when fuel prices reached EUR 0.63. Since then, fuel prices have fallen again, reaching a low of EUR 0.28 in February 2016. The first eight months of 2018 show an increasing trend. The average real price in August 2018 was EUR 0.54 per litre. \u000a fuel fuel prices taxes TERM TERM021 021 p2683 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2684 (dp2685 g19 Ven p2686 sg20 Nsg11 VFair and efficient transport pricing is a crucial precondition for sustainable transport. It implies that users pay for the full (environmental and social) costs of transport. Therefore, the price and tax levels of fuel are important for three key reasons:
\u000aThe European Transport White Paper (EC, 2001) proposed to 'harmonise excise duty on diesel for commercial uses, which in practice would be higher than the current average tax on diesel'. The aim of this harmonisation is to achieve better internalisation of external costs. Harmonisation also aims to improve the internal market by establishing a level playing field for shippers from different EU Member States and creating more stable prices in road transport. However, a 2002 Commission proposal to do so was rejected by the Council. The proposal resulted in decreases in excise duty incomes for several countries, up to 50 % in the UK. Also transport organisations argued against fuel tax revision. More recently in the European transport White Paper of 2011 (EC, 2011), the Commission has proposed to 'revise motor fuel taxation with clear identification of the energy and CO2 component' by 2016.
\u000aEU minimum levels for road fuel taxes are set out in Council Directive 2003/96/EC on the taxation of energy products. As a result, the minimum excise duty for unleaded petrol increased from EUR 287 to EUR 359 per 1 000 litres. For diesel fuel, the minimum rate increased from EUR 245 to EUR 302 per 1 000 litres in 2004, and up to EUR 330 per 1 000 litres in 2010 (EC, 2007).
\u000aThe EC\u2019s 'Europe 2020' strategy (EC, 2010) includes a positive approach to energy taxes and greening transport: 'where taxes may have to rise, this should, where possible, be done in conjunction with making the tax systems more 'growth-friendly'. For example, raising taxes on labour, as has occurred in the past at great cost to jobs, should be avoided. Rather, Member States should seek to shift the tax burden from labour to energy and environmental taxes as part of 'greening' of taxation systems'.
p2687 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2688 (dp2689 g19 Ven p2690 sg20 Nsg11 VThe 2011 Transport White Paper suggests that EU motor fuel taxation should be restructured to clearly identify the energy and CO2 components.Â
p2691 sbtp2692 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2693 (dp2694 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/size-of-the-vehicle-fleet p2695 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2696 (dp2697 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/size-of-the-vehicle-fleet/size-of-the-vehicle-fleet-10 p2698 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2699 (dp2700 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM032 p2701 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2702 (dp2703 g19 Ven p2704 sg20 Nsg11 VSize of the vehicle fleet in Europe p2705 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2706 (dp2707 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs the number of vehicles in Europe growing? p2708 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2709 (dp2710 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vsize-of-the-vehicle-fleet-10 Size of the vehicle fleet in Europe \u000a Car ownership in the EU-28 area is growing rapidly, especially in the EU-13 where fleet size in countries with relatively low levels of car ownership is increasing. \u000a Increasing private vehicle ownership is proven to lead to increased use of private vehicles and could result in less use of public transport in the future. However, over the period 2000-2017, the number of buses/coaches per capita in the EU-28 increased by 4.7 % . \u000a The number of trucks per unit of GDP (truck intensity) decreased slightly between 2005 and 2017. It is generally higher in the EU-13, with Bulgaria, Poland and Greece having the highest intensity in 2017. \u000a In the EU-28, the percentage of diesel cars in the total car fleet continues to increase. In 2017, 42 % of the EU-28 car fleet had diesel engines. This 'dieselisation' is particularly high in Lithuania (67 %) and France (66 %), followed by Luxembourg (62 %). \u000a passenger cars term 032 freight transport passenger transport TERM TERM032 032 p2711 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2712 (dp2713 g19 Ven p2714 sg20 Nsg11 VThe level of vehicle ownership is closely related to car use and thus volume of mobility. Especially in urban areas, it is also related to traffic congestion and the higher concentration of air pollutants in the atmosphere.
p2715 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2716 (dp2717 g19 Ven p2718 sg20 Nsg11 VThere are no specific objectives or targets related to the size and composition of the vehicle fleet. Policy objectives are rather set with respect to the average age and environmental performance of the fleet.
p2719 sbtp2720 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2721 (dp2722 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/proportion-of-vehicle-fleet-meeting-5 p2723 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2724 (dp2725 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/proportion-of-vehicle-fleet-meeting-5/assessment p2726 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2727 (dp2728 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VTERM034 p2729 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2730 (dp2731 g19 Ven p2732 sg20 Nsg11 VNew registrations of electric vehicles in Europe p2733 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2734 (dp2735 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VNew registrations of electric vehicles in Europe, aggregated level assessment | New registrations of electric vehicles in Europe, disaggregate level assessment p2736 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2737 (dp2738 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment New registrations of electric vehicles in Europe The uptake of electric vehicles in Europe is increasing, in line with the EU\u2019s policy objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transport. However, market penetration remains relatively low. In 2019, electric car registrations were close to 550 000 units, having reached 300 000 units in 2018. This represents an increase from 2 to 3.5 % of total car registrations. The uptake of electric vans also increased, from 0.8 % of total registrations in 2018 to 1.3 % in 2019. Battery electric vehicles, rather than plug-in hybrid, accounted for the majority of electric vehicle registrations in 2019 for cars and vans. passenger cars electric vehicles transport electric cars TERM TERM034 034 p2739 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2740 (dp2741 g19 Ven p2742 sg20 Nsg11 VTransport represents almost a quarter of Europe's greenhouse gas emissions and is the main cause of air pollution in cities. Since 2009, EU legislation has set mandatory emission targets for new cars and, since 2011, for new vans. These regulations have resulted in the gradual introduction and promotion of more fuel-efficient, less polluting vehicles. Currently, there are no specific objectives or targets related to the number of different types of alternative fuel vehicle as a proportion of the total vehicle fleet. Policy objectives are rather set with respect to the environmental performance of newly registered passenger cars and vans.
\u000aNew registrations of alternative-fuel vehicles are an indirect indication of the level of improvement in road-transport fuel efficiency and pollutant emissions. The overall objective of this specific indicator is to monitor the penetration of electric vehicles in the market and, hence, to be able to estimate progress towards environmental targets.
p2743 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2744 (dp2745 g19 Ven p2746 sg20 Nsg11 VNo target sets until 2025.
\u000aThe specific CO2 emission target of a manufacturer (Regulation (EU) 2019/631) will be relaxed if its share of zero or low emitting vehicles registered in a given year exceeds the 15% from 2025 on and 35% from 2030 on. Please see also indicator TERM017
p2747 sbtp2748 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2749 (dp2750 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/urban-waste-water-treatment p2751 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2752 (dp2753 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/urban-waste-water-treatment/urban-waste-water-treatment-assessment-5 p2754 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2755 (dp2756 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWAT005 p2757 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2758 (dp2759 g19 Ven p2760 sg20 Nsg11 VUrban waste water treatment in Europe p2761 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2762 (dp2763 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VHow effective are policies to improve urban waste water treatment at reducing discharges of nutrients and organic matter into surface waters in Europe? p2764 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2765 (dp2766 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vurban-waste-water-treatment-assessment-5 Urban waste water treatment in Europe The treatment of urban waste water is fundamental to ensuring public health and environmental protection. Urban waste water treatment in all parts of Europe has improved over the last 30-40 years. \u000a In 2017, most European countries collected and treated sewage to tertiary level from most of their population. In EU-27 countries (EEA 2020), 69 % of the population were connected to tertiary level treatment and 13 % to secondary level treatment. \u000a Countries where less than 80 % of the population were connected to public urban waste water treatment systems were Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia. waste water treatment infrastructure thematic assessments urban waste water nutrients soer2010 water resources emissions urban waste water treatment pollution WAT WAT005 005 p2767 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2768 (dp2769 g19 Ven p2770 sg20 Nsg11 VThe main objective of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC) (UWWTD), and equivalent national legislation for non-EU countries, is to protect surface waters from the adverse effects of waste water discharges. The UWWTD prescribes the level of treatment required before discharge to surface waters. It requires Member States to provide all urban settlements (called 'agglomerations' in the UWWTD) of more than 2 000 p.e. with collecting systems. Primary (mechanical) and secondary (i.e. biological) treatments must be provided for all agglomerations of more than 2 000 p.e. that discharge into fresh waters. Special requirements, with intermediate deadlines depending on the sensitivity of the receiving waters, are placed on urban settlements of more than 10 000 p.e., with various size classes. The performance of the treatment is assessed using several determinands (biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD); plus total nitrogen and total phosphorus in the case of more stringent treatment).
\u000aFor urban settlements smaller than those described above and equipped with a collecting system, the treatment must be 'appropriate', meaning that the discharge must allow the receiving waters to meet the relevant quality standards.
\u000aThe UWWTD, adopted in 1991, is also a basic measure under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The WFD requires the estimation and identification of significant point- and diffuse-source pollution, in particular by the substances listed in Annex VIII, from urban, industrial, agricultural and other installations and activities, based, inter alia, on information gathered, for instance, under Articles 15 and 17 of the UWWTD. Based on the substances listed in Annex VIII WFD, the following are important for this indicator:
\u000aMember States should thus take the necessary steps to collect these data. Reducing pollutants stemming from waste water is one of the key challenges of reaching good ecological and good chemical status of surface waters, as required by the WFD.
\u000aCollecting and treating waste water has required huge investment across Europe in recent decades. The kinds of new challenges facing urban waste water treatment, such as climate change, resource efficiency and improved environmental protection, are set out in the EEA briefing Urban waste water treatment for 21st century challenges.
\u000aFurther information on emissions from industry to water, including to urban waste water treatment plants, is available in Industrial waste water treatment - pressures on Europe's environment.
p2771 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2772 (dp2773 g19 Ven p2774 sg20 Nsg11 VThe UWWT Directive (91/271/EEC) aims to protect the environment from the adverse effects of urban waste water discharges. It prescribes the level of treatment required before discharge and should have been fully implemented in the EU-15 countries by 2005. For the newer Member States (i.e. the EU-13), staged transition periods were set within the Accession Treaties which, in principle, did not extend beyond 2015. However, in Romania, smaller agglomerations (with less than 10 000 p.e.) should have complied with the directive by the end of 2018, and Croatia has different transition periods, from 2018 to 2023.
\u000aUnder the directive, EU-15 Member States were required to provide all urban settlements of more than 2 000 p.e. with collecting systems and all waste waters collected had to be provided with appropriate treatment by 2005. Secondary treatment (i.e. biological treatment) must be provided for all urban settlements of more than 2 000 p.e. that discharge into fresh waters, while more advanced treatment (tertiary treatment) is required for discharges into sensitive areas.
\u000aThe achievements resulting from the UWWTD should be seen as an integral part of achieving good status for all waters under the WFD.
\u000a\u000a
\u000a
Since 2007, the European Commission has highlighted the challenges arising from water scarcity and droughts, adopting a relevant policy document (EC, 2007), followed by a series of policy reviews in subsequent years. In addition, water has become part of the Resource Efficiency Roadmap, which was adopted by the Commission in 2011 (EC, 2011). This includes a clear target of keeping water abstraction below 20 % of available renewable freshwater resources. Where crop production is a significant driver of water abstraction, this would require substantial improvements in decreasing water demand and increasing efficiency of irrigation water use. This strategic approach also constitutes one of the key targets of the Seventh Environment Action Programme, which aims to turn the EU into a resource-efficient, green and competitive low-carbon economy.
\u000aAccording to the 'Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources' (EC, 2012) water efficiency targets should be developed by the river basin authorities in each river basin, which suffers or is projected to suffer from water stress. These targets should be substantiated at sector level (e.g. agriculture, households, industry, energy) and should contribute to the WFD objectives for good status of water bodies. The WFD also promotes efficiency and reuse measures, including water-saving irrigation techniques. Furthermore, the Commission has developed guidelines that support the integration of water reuse in water resources planning and management in the context of WFD implementation (EC, 2016). In May 2018, new rules were proposed to stimulate and facilitate water reuse in the EU for agricultural irrigation, which are currently negotiated by the co-legislators.
\u000aThe Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) supports investments on water conservation and the upgrade of irrigation infrastructures and training of farmers to improve irrigation techniques. The cross-compliance provisions of the CAP also include obligations for farmers to maintain 'good agricultural and environmental conditions'.
\u000aThe EU is committed to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Goal 6.4 requires that 'By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity'.
p2799 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2800 (dp2801 g19 Ven p2802 sg20 Nsg11 VNo specific target or threshold has been set for this indicator.
p2803 sbtp2804 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2805 (dp2806 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/emission-intensity-of-domestic-sector p2807 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2808 (dp2809 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/emission-intensity-of-domestic-sector/assessment p2810 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2811 (dp2812 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWREI002 p2813 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2814 (dp2815 g19 Ven p2816 sg20 Nsg11 VEmission intensity of the domestic sector in Europe p2817 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2818 (dp2819 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VIs nutrient emission in water from the domestic sector decoupling from population growth? p2820 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2821 (dp2822 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Emission intensity of the domestic sector in Europe Absolute decoupling of nutrient emissions from domestic sector and the population growth over the period of almost two decades (1990-2009) is observed in thirteen countries (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Finland, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia and Turkey). The actual extent of decoupling, and the differences in trends among countries, may be partially explained by different levels of numbers of inhabitants connected to tertiary wastewater treatment technologies \u000a When making the EU wide comparison of the extend of decoupling of nutrient emissions from population growth, the actual rate of population connected to different types of treatment (elaborated in the CSI 024) should be taken into consideration, and completeness of the data available on population connected to collecting systems without treatment. The status of the implementation of the UWWTD which protects the water environment from the adverse effects of discharges of urban waste water, the level of investment in the water and wastewater management ,as well as the status of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and Groundwater Directive may have an impact. Furthermore household patterns as well as the household income level affecting the production and composition of waste water should be considered as well. \u000a It is assumed that the use of actual data on loads discharged from wastewater treatment plants combined with the load values calculated for population not connected to the waste water treatment would add value to the decoupling indicator, as it would better reflect the real situation.. \u000a nutrient emissions urban waste water waste water discharge water treatment plants emissions nitrogen phosphorus WREI WREI002 002 p2823 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2824 (dp2825 g19 Ven p2826 sg20 Nsg11 VIn March 2010, the European Commission issued \u2018Europe 2020 strategy\u2019 - the European Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It highlights \u2013 among other things - the need for a more resource efficient economy. The \u201cFlagship initiative\u201d under the Europe 2020 strategy, called \u201cA resource efficient Europe\u201d, establishes resource efficiency as the guiding principle for EU policies on energy, transport, climate change, industry, commodities, agriculture, fisheries, biodiversity and regional development. The Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe defines medium- and long-term objectives to achieve efficient resource use in the region. Decoupling, in the sense of breaking the link between economic growth and resource use, is a central concept of the strategy for making Europe resource efficient. The 2050 vision and the objectives for 2020 are to be addressed in the sector initiatives that shall contribute to the resource-efficient Europe Flagship Initiative (i.e. the 7th EU Environmental Action Programme or the revision of the Common Agriculture Policy, Water Framework Directive and Groundwater Directive).
p2827 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2828 (dp2829 g19 Ven p2830 sg20 Nsg11 VThe Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD; 91/271/EEC) aims to protect the environment from the adverse effects of urban wastewater discharges. It prescribes the level of treatment required before discharge and has to be fully implemented in the EU-15 countries by 2005 and in the ten new Member States by 2008 - 2015. The directive requires Member States to provide all agglomerations of more than 2 000 population equivalent with collecting systems, and all wastewaters collected to be provided with appropriate treatment by 2005. Secondary treatment (i.e. biological treatment) must be provided for all agglomerations of more than 2 000 population equivalent that discharge into fresh waters, while more advanced treatment (tertiary treatment) is required for discharges into sensitive areas.
\u000aThe achievements through the UWWTD have to be seen as an integrated part of objectives under the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which aim at a good ecological and chemical status for all waters by 2015. That means that more stringent emission targets may be set in case it is needed for achieving the good status.
\u000aEU wide targets related to the nutrient emission intensity of domestic sectors, or the decoupling of nutrient emission from population growth have not been set.
p2831 sbtp2832 a(g6 (g7 g8 NtRp2833 (dp2834 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/diversion-from-landfill p2835 sbg6 (g7 g8 NtRp2836 (dp2837 g11 Vhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/diversion-from-landfill/assessment p2838 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2839 (dp2840 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VWST006 p2841 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2842 (dp2843 g19 Ven p2844 sg20 Nsg11 VDiversion of waste from landfill p2845 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2846 (dp2847 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 VAre we reducing landfilling of waste in Europe? p2848 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2849 (dp2850 g19 Nsg20 Nsg11 Vassessment Diversion of waste from landfill \u2022 Landfilling has negative impacts on the environment and economy and therefore should be avoided if at all possible. \u000a \u2022 European countries have made relatively good progress in diverting waste from landfill in recent years for almost all waste streams, particularly for household and similar waste. \u000a \u2022 During the period 2010-2016, the share of total waste (excluding major mineral waste) disposed of by landfilling decreased from 29 % to 25 % in the 28 EU Member States, Iceland, Norway and Serbia. The proportion of household and similar waste and other waste disposed of by landfilling decreased by 47.2 % and 19 %, respectively. However, the landfilling of combustion waste increased by 20.6 % and of sorting residues by 40.1 %. \u000a \u2022 According to the Landfill Directive, the proportion of municipal waste disposed of by landfilling should be reduced to 10 % or less of the total amount of municipal waste generated by 2035. By 2017, the proportion of municipal waste entering landfill had been reduced to 21.0 %, and, of 37 European countries, 11 had reduced municipal waste landfilling rates by more than 40.0 % and 10 landfilled less than 10 % of their municipal waste; however, 15 still had municipal waste landfilling rates of more than 50.0 %. \u000a \u2022 Trends in waste management have also changed. During the period 2008-2017, the rate of municipal waste landfilling decreased by 43.0 %, while energy recovery from municipal waste increased by 72.1 %, material recycling increased by 22.5 % and composting and digestion increased by 18.6 %. landfill rates waste waste deposit waste management municipal waste WST WST006 006 p2851 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2852 (dp2853 g19 Ven p2854 sg20 Nsg11 VCurrent EU waste policy is based on the waste hierarchy, which prioritises waste prevention, followed by preparing for reuse, recycling, other recovery and, finally, disposal or landfilling, which is the least desirable option. Landfilling is considered one of the least suitable methods for waste management because it not only leads to significant material loss, but also poses risks to the environment (production of greenhouse gases, water and air pollution, etc.). The main underlying principle of a circular economy is to keep resources and their value in the economy for as long as possible rather than lose them as waste.
\u000aThe 2011 Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM (2011) 571) contains a section focused on turning waste into resources and developing a combination of policies that help to create a full recycling economy. In 2013, the 7th EAP was adopted. It also focuses on turning waste into resources (with the prevention of waste generation being the highest priority, followed by reuse and recycling) as well as on 'phasing out wasteful and damaging practices like landfilling'.
\u000aEU waste policies include several specific provisions and targets for the collection, recycling and diversion from landfill of different waste streams. The circular economy package was adopted by the European Commission in 2015 and contains an action plan for a circular economy and legislative proposals that set targets and a framework for waste management at EU and Member State levels and facilitate a transition to a more circular economy. Directive 2018/850/EC amending Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfilling of waste contains the provision of applying appropriate measures until 2035, restricting the landfilling of all waste that is suitable for recycling or other material or energy recovery. This directive sets the target that by 2030 the amount of municipal waste landfilled must be reduced to 10 % of the total amount of municipal waste generated.
\u000aThe diversion of waste from landfill and the decreasing of risks connected with emissions to air, water and soil are dominant interests at the global level too. In 2015, The United Nations Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Goal 12 includes several targets aimed at 'ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns', including the target to 'achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment' by 2020 (SDG 12.4).
\u000ap2855 sbg6 (g16 g8 NtRp2856 (dp2857 g19 Ven p2858 sg20 Nsg11 V
Article V of Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfilling of waste was amended by Directive (EU) 2018/850 and includes the following targets for all Member States:
\u000ap2859 sbtp2860 asS'var_names' p2861 (lp2862 Vspecification p2863 aVassessment p2864 aVcodes p2865 aVlabel p2866 aVpolicy_questions p2867 aVkey_message p2868 aVpolicy_context_description p2869 aVpolicy_context_targets p2870 asS'has_result' p2871 Nss.