kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Europaudvalget 2021
KOM (2021) 0400
Offentligt

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels, 12.5.2021

SWD(2021) 141 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Towards a monitoring and outlook framework for the zero pollution ambition

Accompanying the document

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the

European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions

Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All

EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil'

{COM(2021) 400 final} - {SWD(2021) 140 final}

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Table of Contents

3.1.

3.2.

3.3.

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2

Purpose, objectives and targets .............................................................................. 4

Background .............................................................................................................. 6

A short history of pollution monitoring..................................................................... 6

Achievement and challenges of existing pollution monitoring ............................... 10

Other existing and foreseen policy monitoring frameworks ................................... 12

Zero Pollution Monitoring .................................................................................... 17

4.1. Concept .................................................................................................................... 17

4.2. Monitoring key impacts / harm ............................................................................... 21

4.2.1. Pollution, human health and well-being .................................................... 21

4.2.2. Pollution, ecosystems and planetary boundaries ....................................... 22

4.3. Monitoring key pressures and sources..................................................................... 25

4.4. Monitoring key drivers and responses ..................................................................... 27

4.5. Innovative research initiatives monitoring pollution in an integrated way ............. 28

Zero pollution outlook and foresight ................................................................... 32

Data, knowledge needs and data management ................................................... 35

Governance, milestones and deliverables ............................................................ 38

Conclusions and next steps ................................................................................... 40

Annex 1: Non-exhaustive overview of relevant targets and objectives for pollution set

out in EU policies and laws

Annex 2: Indicative list of proposed indicators to be explored for the zero pollution

monitoring framework

Annex 3: Overview of possible pollutants to be covered by the zero pollution outlook

report

Annex 4: Illustrative example on handling of chemical monitoring data in water

environment

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

1. I

NTRODUCTION

Pollution has major negative impacts: it affects human health and puts pressure on the

species, ecosystems and their services that we want to protect. For several decades, the

EU and its Member States have been monitoring different types of pollution

in relation

to their presence (concentration) in the environment (state), their

impacts,

the amounts

entering the environment (pressures) and the sources from which the pollution originates

(drivers). And then the most effective actions to be taken are identified (response)

. Such

a holistic and integrated monitoring framework already exists for greenhouse gas (GHG)

emissions, for air pollution affecting human health, for marine oil spill detection and

monitoring

and several other environment policy areas

, where it is possible not only to

determine the past and current pollution levels (monitoring), but also to predict, through

modelling systems, possible sources of pollution and future trends based on various

scenarios or assumptions (outlook).

However, pollution monitoring framework at the EU level or beyond is not as connected

and integrated across media, pollutants or sectors as it could be. It is often a set of

independent pollution monitoring systems covering the various pollution domains

covered by EU environmental policy. For many pollution types, only certain elements of

such a monitoring framework are well developed. But all this has been changing for

some time now and there is an opportunity to use the zero pollution ambition to take

monitoring and outlook efforts to the next level.

Due to stronger legally binding frameworks, EU level monitoring for air and water

pollution has been more advanced than for soil but efforts are underway to close the gap.

Furthermore, land-based and marine pollution or cross-media (air, water

, soil) transfers

of pollution can be further integrated. Data gathering or developing models necessary for

policy making is becoming easier and more sophisticated, e.g. by reducing technical and

administrative obstacles in accessing up-to-date data and using new technologies and

thereby reducing the costs associated with the collection and assessment of data. Reliable

fit-for-purpose data are at the base of all assessments, a good strategy and efficient set-up

is needed in order to be cost effective. New approaches will allow progress (target

screening, etc.), while previously costs have been prohibitive.

Once data have been collected at EU level, there are many different assessments

addressing pollution issues and messages stemming from a variety of pollution-related

analysis can sometimes be confusing (see chapter 4). They are mainly based on

indicators related to specific types of pollution across the various domains covered by EU

See Article 3(2) Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU: “Pollution

means the direct or indirect

introduction, as a result of human activity, of substances, vibrations, heat or noise into air, water or

land which may be harmful to human health or the quality of the environment, result in damage to

material property, or impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment”.

This DPSIR (drivers-pressures-state-impact-response) conceptual monitoring framework developed

and used by the European Environment Agency (EEA) (and used increasingly by other bodies, e.g. the

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)) frames

the reality in a simplified way.

CleanSeaNet service of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)

An illustrative example is the Circular Economy Monitoring Framework (COM(2018)

and

SWD(2018) 17)

In most instances throughout the document, ‘water’ is mentioned in the sense

of freshwater and marine

water.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

laws (air, noise, water, marine, nature and biodiversity, soils, chemicals, nutrients, waste,

plastic, industrial emissions etc.). They were developed and implemented ‘from the

bottom up’, focussing on the needs

and obligations of the particular pieces of legislation.

The European Green Deal can help create the momentum to extract and communicate

pollution-related issues in a more integrated narrative, giving a coherent policy message

or create synergies for actions where root causes are similar.

Hence, the Zero Pollution ambition for a non-toxic environment announced in the

European Green Deal

provides the impetus and mandate to improve knowledge on the

presence, effects and flows of pollutants in the environment and to integrate this

knowledge into a coherent and holistic framework. Moreover, the use of a variety of data

sources and their integration will result in comparative advantages by cohesively merging

and dynamically visualizing complex environmental data together with other data (e.g.

economic, social or health-related data). This can be achieved by adhering to fully open

data policies and enabling the discovery of, access to, licensing and use of environmental

data originating from different data custodians and regimes, in full respect of the existing

data protection rules

. Similarly, scenarios and modelling used for outlook analyses as

well as the underlying data need to be transparent and open to review. Building on these

data and other information sources, it will be ultimately important better link the policy

debate and the assessment debate and to improve the science-policy interface.

The Zero Pollution Action Plan for air, water and soil offers the opportunity for the

development and regular application of such an integrated monitoring and outlook

framework, complementing the monitoring framework for greenhouse gases set up to

monitor the EU’s climate reduction and carbon neutrality targets

and the monitoring

frameworks which aim to track the targets set out in the Biodiversity Strategy

and the

Farm to Fork Strategy

. Together with the Monitoring Framework for the Circular

Economy

and the indicator framework on chemicals

, these elements can build the

core pillars for a newly developed environmental monitoring framework foreseen under

the 8

Environment Action Programme (8

EAP)

The monitoring framework will also be compatible with the Better Regulation

Guidelines

and make best use of the European Environment Agency’s (EEA) and

IPBES’s DPSIR frameworks

. Moreover, it can ultimately help also to underpin the

Commission’s performance framework for the European Green Deal and

other

monitoring efforts, e.g. under the European Semester and the EU's Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs) monitoring framework.

Consequently, the purpose of this document is to

COM(2019) 640

Set out by the

General Data Protection Regulation

(GDPR)

The monitoring, reporting and outlook framework for greenhouse gas emissions and its link to air

monitoring and outlook serves as an inspiration for the zero pollution monitoring and outlook

framework. Consistency and complementarity will be ensured but it is excluded from the scope of this

paper.

COM(2020) 380

COM(2020) 381

SWD(2018) 17

COM(2020) 667

COM(2020) 652

COM(2017)350, in particular

section V

on monitoring

see footnote 1

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel



initiate a consultation with experts from Member States, international

organisations and other stakeholders with the aim to develop a common

understanding and ownership;

scope and frame an initial outline and content for a zero pollution monitoring and

outlook framework (as contribution to the wider 8

EAP monitoring);

plan the work ahead and identify actions where further efforts are needed to

ensure that the monitoring and outlook generate timely and policy relevant

information.



The outcome of the consultation will be taken into account for the preparation of the first

Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook Report in 2022 and to further develop the

coherent/policy-relevant zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework until 2024 as

an input to wider monitoring frameworks such as the 8th Environment Action

Programme, the Sustainable

Development Goals and the EEA’s regular reports on ‘The

European Environment: State and Outlook’

2. P

URPOSE

OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS

The overall purpose and objective(s) for the zero pollution monitoring and outlook

framework are set out in the Action Plan

. They build on the overall (Article 2.1) and

specific (Article 2.2 (d), (e) and (f)) objectives set out in the Commission Proposal for an

Environment Action Programme

EAP). This monitoring framework is

implementing the ‘zero pollution’ part of the overarching monitoring set out in Article 4

of that Proposal.

Building on these overarching objectives, the specific purposes of the monitoring and

outlook framework are to be:



A knowledge system driving the zero pollution ambition towards 2050 and a

means for communication, allowing for accountability and engagement of

citizens;

A contribution to defining wellbeing

and planetary boundaries linked to

pollution including the ambition to have (at some point) an integrated assessment

of the total pollution load (exposure) on human health and (impact) on species

and ecosystems;

A tool to measure the progress of the zero pollution ambition including the

illustration of some successful or challenging policy and implementation progress

and effectiveness illustrated through a few telling examples as well as identifying

synergies and strengthening coherence with related policy areas;

A driver for change towards a more streamlined, simplified, modern, digital

monitoring and reporting as well as the uptake of new digital and earth

observation technologies resulting in real-near time data flows presented in an

accessible way, while reducing administrative burden.



https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer

COM(2021) 400

COM(2020) 652

The wellbeing framework is rather broad (see e.g.

OECD),

in the context of this document it focuses

on the health dimension which is an integral part of the wellbeing framework.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

The approach is also designed to create an overarching, integrated monitoring that

satisfies the Better Regulation Guidelines, in particular Section V. Hence, the monitoring

and outlook framework will cover the entire scope of the zero pollution ambition

including the monitoring systems developed under Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability,

the pollution dimension of the upcoming EU Soil Strategy and the upcoming Integrated

Nutrient Management Action Plan. In terms of scope, the definitions of pollution and

pollutants as set out in EU legislation

provide for a wide coverage of releases to the

environment. Moreover, the pollution of soil

will include land in the wider sense where

this is relevant.

The Zero Pollution Action Plan

has set out an overarching vision for 2050 some

illustrative targets for 2030 in addition to a number of objectives and targets set out in

other Green Deal initiatives (namely the Farm to Fork Strategy and the Chemicals

Strategy). These policy targets are complemented by a set of specific legally binding

objectives in key pieces of legislation for air, noise, water, marine protection and soil as

well as a number of sources specific EU law (see Annex 1 for details).

The monitoring framework will provide an assessment for the achievement of the targets

as well as a regular ‘snapshot’ of the state of environment as regards the key challenges

caused by the pollution. It will ideally give an answer to the question of whether the

existing objectives have been achieved and, if not (yet), what the ‘distance to target’ is

and in what

areas (pollution types, sources, sectors, countries,…) pollution challenges

remain. To this end, the monitoring will look at the pollution situation at local and

regional level across the EU but focus on the assessment per Member States, the cross-

border dimension of pollution and the EU-wide an inter-continental aspects, to the extent

possible. For the existing targets (e.g. those listed in Annex 1), a

baseline

or reference

year

against which progress will be measured is already established. However, for other

pollution types (e.g. soil pollution), this baseline still needs to be established. If possible,

the aim is to establish such a baseline on the latest available, representative data

when

publishing the monitoring part of the

first Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook in

2022.

Moreover, the

planned revision of some laws

will look at the

updating of the ambition

level or the widening of the scope

in their particular area, which may result in additional

or updated targets following an impact assessment. These updateds will have to be

factored into the future iterations of the zero pollution monitoring.

In any case,

the approach will be iterative

given the diversity and the wide scope of

pollution. In the first round (2022), the approach will focus on a limited number of

impacts or pollutants based on readily available data. At the same time, the planning for

the next iteration (2024) and the identification for key work areas to improve the

In particular, Article 3(2) Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU, Article 2 (10) and (12) of the

Taxonomy Regulation (EU) 2020/852, point 8 of Article 3 of Directive 2008/56/EC and point 33 of

Article 2 of Directive 2000/60/EC are the most relevant in this context.

Soil means the top layer

of the Earth’s crust situated between the bedrock and the surface, which is

composed of mineral particles, organic matter, water, air and living organisms (see Article 2 (11) of

Regulation (EU) 2020/852).

COM(2021) 400

Not to be confused with a baseline that represents a business-as-usual scenario in modelling terms.

Annual indicators should ideally have a reference year between 2018-2021 bearing in mind that 2020

and maybe also 2021 will not be representative in terms of pollution because of the pandemic.

However, this needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

framework at each iteration will be identified. In this context, it will be necessary to fill

data and knowledge gaps if they are identified as relevant and important for better policy

making. Administrative burdens can be minimised by using modern digital solutions and

complementary data sources (e.g. Copernicus

or citizen science) and applying a more

modern data management approach (see section 6 below). Guiding these developments

are the established or developing policies for data, namely the European Data Strategy

and the one substance, one assessment approach for chemicals, building on the principles

of openness, transparency and accountability.

To guide these developments, a consultative process and a regular review mechanism

will be foreseen to ensure that the developments are on the right track and are

coordinated with all relevant actors and initiatives.

Complementary to this, the outlook part of the

Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook

Report

(also to be published in 2022 together with the monitoring report) will project

into the future trend expected if

no action is taken (‘baseline’) and compares it with the

scenarios for a planned or agreed set of measures. It will try to anticipate whether actions

at international, EU, national, regional or local level are sufficient to close the “gaps”

identified by the monitoring. Already now, the Commission publishes a Clean Air

Outlook

, which is complementary to the reports published in the context of the

Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action

. In other

words, this framework and the climate and energy reporting under the governance

regulation are distinct but mutually reinforcing. In addition, work is ongoing to present a

Clean Water and Marine Outlook in 2022 and outlook work in other areas, such as soil,

could also be added, once available. The aim is to combine these into an overarching zero

pollution outlook which can also help to include cross-sector and cross-media analysis

(e.g. for nutrients) and help improve monitoring consistency and streamlining of

assessment efforts. The

foresight or horizon scanning capacities

will also be developed

(see section 5 for details).

3. B

ACKGROUND

3.1.

A short history of pollution monitoring

Pollution was one of the earliest environmental concerns that was addressed by the EU

(then the European Economic Community-EEC) in 1973 as part of the 1

Environment

Action Programme

. It was an essential element of European cooperation because of its

cross-border dimension and its effects on the single market. In fact, the internal market

legal base was used to regulate pollution to waters and air already since the early

Seventies in order to ensure a high level of protection of the environment and a level

A wealth of Copernicus information products to monitor the status of the air quality, water and soil are

provided for on a full, free and open basis by the Copernicus Atmosphere monitoring service, the

Copernicus Marine Environment Service, the Copernicus Land Monitoring service, the Copernicus

Climate Change service, the Copernicus Emergency Management service and the Copernicus Security

services.

COM(2020) 66

The first Clean Air Outlook was published in 2018 (COM(2020) 446) and the second in 2021

(COM(2021) 3)

COM(2020) 564 and

related reports

Declaration of the Council on the programme of action of the European Communities on the

Environment (OJ

C112, 20/12/1973, p. 1)

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

playing field for the economic operators who were responsible for the pollution. Even

before that, chemicals legislation

was introduced which addressed the hazardous

properties of chemical substances.

However, pollution did not only transfer between countries but also between air, water

and soil. In 1996, the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive

was

an important milestone that recognised that the protection of human health and the

environment required a holistic vision and integrated approach. Since then, pollution is

defined in EU law

as:

‘the direct or indirect introduction, as a result

of human activity, of substances,

vibrations, heat or noise into air, water or land which may be harmful to human health

or the quality of the environment, result in damage to material property, or impair or

interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses

of the environment’

This definition has been largely replicated in many EU laws

, it stood the test of time,

and now we can build the zero pollution ambition on it.

The idea that we need a long-term

vision towards a ‘zero pollution world’ is also not

new. It was already entertained since the late 1990s when the Ministerial Meeting of the

North Sea countries and later the OSPAR Commission adopted the marine protection

objective to achieve the

‘cessation or phase out of discharges, emissions or losses of

hazardous substances’

until 2020. They realised that through air, water (rivers) and soil

(sediments), our seas and ocean are becoming the sink (‘dump’)

of all the pollution that

enters our environment. This policy drive for marine protection ultimately found its way

into the Water Framework Directive (WFD)

, influenced the definition of restrictions for

PBT

substances in the chemicals legislation

and eventually in the Marine Strategy

Framework Directive (MSFD)

Building on these, and many other pieces of legislation, the EU has made significant

progress in pollution reduction, which resulted in a number of success stories, e.g.:



Bathing and drinking waters is generally of high quality in Europe

;

Air pollution, in particular from industry, has been significantly reduced

;

Heavy metal pollution in water and air was substantially cut since the 1970s

;

The first rules on classification, labelling and packaging of substances were established by Directive

67/548/EEC

Directive 96/61/EC

See article 3 (2) of the Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU which is the successor of Directive

96/61/EC

E.g. Directive 2000/60/EC (point 33 of Article 2), Directive 2008/56/EC (point 8 of Article 3) or

Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (points 10 and 12 of Article 2)

And this is not the only sink, soil is also storing a lot of pollution.

See articles 1 (c), 4 (a) (iv) and 16 of Directive 2000/60/EC

persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic

E.g. REACH Regulation

Directive 2008/56/EC, Article 1 and 2b

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/public-health-and-environmental-protection

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/industry/stationary/ied/evaluation.htm

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/eea32-heavy-metal-hm-emissions-1/assessment-

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel



Many hazardous substances and pesticides were banned or their use was

drastically restricted

;

Acid rain strongly decreased thanks also to the actions of the EU in the frame of

the UNECE Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution.

Nevertheless, some of the most pressing pollution issues at the time are solved, other

persisted and proved more difficult to tackle. In particular, nutrient pollution was causing

huge environment and health impacts (e.g. through eutrophication effects such as ‘dead

zones’) already 50 years ago and we cannot claim that the situation

has much improved

despite various directives in place (nitrates, sewage sludge, urban waste water, air

emission ceilings, etc.), in particular in some marine areas. In addition, new pollution

issues emerged that we were either not aware of (e.g. in relation to PFAS,

pharmaceuticals, or the transition of particulate from some sources to nano-level sizes) or

that we underestimated, such as the marine pollution from plastics, as well as the aquatic

and terrestrial pollution from microplastics. Moreover, combined effects of all types of

pollution mixtures turned out to be of a far greater concern to our health and environment

than just looking at the individual substance. In addition, the pollution is not emitted into

a pristine environment, but added to chemicals and effects on health that have

accumulated over time due to human activities.

It is therefore high time to define a ‘zero pollution world’ that we want to live in, and to

aspire to move in this direction as quickly as we can, with ingenuity and creativity. The

zero pollution ambition for a toxic free environment does exactly that

. Consequently,

we also need to agree on how to measure whether we have reached our policy objectives,

and to modernise and integrate our existing monitoring and outlook frameworks

accordingly. This will help guide us and measure the progress towards achieving the zero

pollution ambition.

E.g.

SWD(2020) 87

COM(2021) 400

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Feedback from the online public consultation on monitoring

The open public consultation for the preparation of the Zero Pollution Action Plan included an

expert section on the pollution monitoring frameworks. Overall, the majority of respondents

(50% or more) completely or somewhat agree with the statements relating to the needed

improvements of the various aspects to pollution policies. 58% of the respondents

completely agree that linkages of health data with pollution data need to improved, while just

over a third of the respondents (33%) consider the existing monitoring frameworks for

pollution at the EU and national level to be sufficient (see figure below). With respect to the

opinions of respondents on the main purpose for a zero pollution monitoring and outlook at EU

level, 60% or more somewhat agree with all of the suggested options. Respondents seem

most uncertain about the “being

'a driver for change' through better communication with

and engagement of citizens”

option, where 23% answered that they neither disagree nor agree.

With respect to the pollutants that should be addressed as a priority at EU level and therefore

included in the monitoring framework, 60% or more of the respondents completely or

somewhat agree with the listed categories of pollution, except the two options related to other

pollution not listed. Pesticides / biocides are ranked first with 72% of the respondents

completely agreeing they should be addressed as a priority, followed by marine litter

(68%), heavy metals (64%), pharmaceuticals (62%), and particulate matter (62%).

Respondents are less certain about addressing noise as a priority, where 20% of the respondents

neither disagree nor agree. Overall, 71% of respondents fully or somewhat agree that ‘developing

an overarching MF at EU level is relevant for their

work’.

Ecorys (2021): “Consultations on the EU Action Plan towards a zero pollution ambition for air, water

and soil”, Synopsis Report (see

‘Have your say’ portal’).

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

3.2.

Achievement and challenges of existing pollution monitoring

Pollution monitoring is as old as the EU’s pollution control policy. It is probably one of

the most comprehensive and advanced sources for the evidence base that we have in the

various environmental domains. For instance, EU air quality and bathing water

monitoring regularly features in the news and its annual reports by the European

Environment Agency generate a high interest and visibility indicating the continued

interest and concern in such issues by the public and policymakers.

The main source of EU level data and information stems from legal obligations in

environmental laws. The Fitness Check of environmental monitoring and reporting

provided, for the first time, a comprehensive overview of these monitoring and reporting

based on environment legislation. Sixty-four pieces of legislation were analysed which

include a total of 181 reporting obligations. Approximately 20% of these obligations

include data and information on pollution, ranging from concentrations in the

environment, exceedances of limit values to sources of pollution or measures to tackle it.

In addition, Commission services

and various EU agencies

are collecting relevant

information either on specific legal basis or on a voluntary basis. Furthermore, projects

from different EU programmes have provided

ad hoc

input to the evidence base. More

recently, citizen’s science has become an increasingly relevant source of complementary

information/knowledge

. Approximately 220 pollution related indicators have been

counted as those being used in one or the other EU policy context, although the actual

number is likely to be higher. It is important to note that certain aspects such as the

monitoring of soil pollution are mainly covered at national level, which results in

different approaches, methodologies and gaps.

As a result, some very successful monitoring products are published, like e.g.:



The European Air Quality Index and the regular Air Quality Reports of the

EEA

;

The annual EEA Bathing Water Report

;

The European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR)

;

There are many other implementation reports on all pollution-related legislation. In

addition, information systems collect, disseminate and share pollution related data, e.g.

the regionally aggregated data on heavy metals, pesticide residues and nutrients in EU

soils (LUCAS Soils) or chemical monitoring data in all media (environment, humans,

food/feed and products) in the Information Platform on Chemical Monitoring

(IPCHEM), to name just a few. Also the THETIS-EU

platform to monitor and report

implementation of environmental laws applicable to maritime transport is a good

SWD(2017) 230

Including Eurostat, the Joint Research Centre and the services working with the Copernicus

programme

Including the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the

European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)

SWD(2020) 149

https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/air/air-quality-index/index

https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/europes-seas-and-coasts/assessments/state-of-bathing-water

https://prtr.eea.europa.eu/

https://portal.emsa.europa.eu/web/thetis-eu

described in the European Maritime Transport

Environmental report

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

example for a successful information system. It combines record and exchange

information with compliance and verifications efforts.

Complementary to national and specific monitoring, the Commission Copernicus earth

observation Programme operational since 2014 operates dedicated full, free and open

data and information services for environmental monitoring of planet health. The

atmosphere monitoring service, the marine environment monitoring service, the maritime

surveillance service are delivering daily routine observation of some pollutants and

offering in some cases forecasts of such pollutants. The atmosphere monitoring service

delivers observations to contribute to the air quality reporting

. These observation are

fully, freely and openly available and are advantageously harmonised and quality-

controlled across countries at pan-European level and at global scale. Reporting and

analysis are published annually for example through the Copernicus ocean state report

(monthly ocean monitoring indicators). Data are made openly and digitally available for

additional analysis in support to policies implementation.As regards to forward-looking

outlooks, the situation is somewhat less advanced. Similar to the projections of climate

policy, the regular Clean Air Outlook

provides a perspective on air emission trends

based on a number of scenarios, which allows for a discussion on the most effective way

to achieve our EU air quality objectives. As for other pollution aspects, work is ongoing,

in particular in relation to water and marine pollution (see section 5).

Despite this impressive and comprehensive evidence base, there are still shortcomings

which prevent a more robust basis for policy evaluations and impact assessment. The

following findings feature regularly in the Commission’s REFIT evaluations, in

particular:



Data are incomplete, are not monitored and/or reported by Member States or

information is late or outdated;

The quality of the data varies and lacks comparability;

The frequency of data collection or transmission is not adequate for policy

indicators (which are needed on an annual or, at least, biannual basis);

The granularity (disaggregation of parameters or geographic levels, e.g. regional)

is not sufficient to allow meaningful policy analysis;

The format and structure of monitored/reported data makes it time consuming to

aggregate and integrate them;

The access to the data is difficult or restrictions hinder their use for different

purposes, in particular from (past) research projects;

Data are not well documented or difficult to interpret and re-use;

Data are not easily findable, accessible and interoperable;

For emerging pollution issues, it is often difficult to get robust, EU-wide data;

https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/copernicus-contributes-european-environment-agencys-2020-air-

quality-europe-report

https://marine.copernicus.eu/access-data/ocean-state-report

and

https://marine.copernicus.eu/access-

data/ocean-monitoring-indicators

Second Clean Air Outlook:

COM(2021) 3

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel



There is multiple reporting and collection of the same data and they do not benefit

from technological progress in digital technologies;

Data cannot be reused for other purposes.

Moreover, there is no thematic overview on pollution that brings all these individual

pieces of information together and provides for an integrated picture. This is reflected in

the lack of indicators for the combined exposure to mixtures of chemicals, and of their

impact on human and ecosystem health.

3.3.

Other existing and foreseen policy monitoring frameworks

In addition to the thematic monitoring described above, there are a number of

overarching monitoring frameworks including the pollution dimension, either existing or

under development. The efforts towards a zero pollution monitoring and outlook

framework are directed towards using what exists and contributing to improving the

deficiencies in the current frameworks. This section provides a short, non-exhaustive

overview on the most relevant wider EU monitoring frameworks and the relationship

with the one on zero pollution.

Monitoring sustainable development goals (SDGs)

The Commission (Eurostat) publishes annually a monitoring report on progress towards

the SDGs in an EU context

. Currently, the report includes a number of pollution-related

indicators. In total, eight out of the 100 indicators are used for directly monitoring

pollution (some of them to monitor two Goals) under the SDGs 6 (water pollution), 11

(air and noise pollution), 12 (toxic chemicals), 14 (marine pollution) and 15 (water

pollution affecting terrestrial ecosystems). In addition also indicators for the SDGs 3

(health) or 7 (energy) are relevant. These indicators are currently the best indicators

available for the purposes of SDG monitoring however there is still scope to more

comprehensively cover some important pollution aspects (e.g. in case of indicators used

for SDGs 3, 12, 14 and 15). The zero pollution monitoring framework can help identify

and develop further indicators to complement those that already exist.

The EEA’s report on ‘The European Environment: State and Outlook’ (SOER)

The flagship report of the European Environment Agency presents the latest knowledge

and data on the environment in Europe every five years

. The overview dashboard (table

ES1 in the 2020 edition of the report) contains 35 themes out of which 14 assessments of

the past trends and outlook are pollution-related. Looking at the detailed maps and

indicators, approximately 30 are used throughout the report. Together, they already

provide a very comprehensive overview.

Furthermore, the EEA possess additional information and data which are also published

as part of both thematic-specific reports, as well as cross-cutting reports, e.g. recently on

the ‘Healthy Environment, Healthy Lives’ report

. There remain, however, opportunities

to further integrate pollution-related issues and in the future to ensure its relevance to the

European Green Deal. Some of the ‘shortcomings’ are also linked

to the overall

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-statistical-books/-/KS-02-20-202

https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer

EEA Report 21/2019

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

shortcomings in the EU’s environmental monitoring and reporting system (as identified,

e.g. in the Commission’s Fitness Check

and in the Chemicals Strategy for

Sustainability

), e.g. the lack of robust and reliable data and indicators on environmental

status and impacts for certain issues such as the impact of chemicals and chemical

mixtures on health and the environment, soil pollution and the better use of modern

technologies to complement traditional reporting of information by Member States.

The Zero Pollution framework can help address these shortcomings and assist the EEA’s

efforts to further develop their evidence base and aligning it with the zero pollution

ambition in the European Green Deal. Hence, all efforts will be done in close

collaboration with the EEA and the EIONET

network of European countries so that

these developments can also benefit the preparation of the next SOER.

Measuring progress towards the 8

Environment Action Programme objectives

The Commission’s proposal

for an 8

Environment Action Programme (8

EAP)

includes a provision on measuring progress (Article 4). This provision will trigger an

overarching discussion on developing an 'umbrella' monitoring framework that builds on

specific work streams to monitor environmental priorities, such as circular economy

biodiversity protection and the zero pollution ambition. The aim is to provide

coherence

between different monitoring exercises

by selecting a limited number of key high-level

indicators that are most appropriate for the purpose of strategic communication towards

the EU’s 2030 and 2050 environment and climate goals. The work on the zero pollution

monitoring and outlook framework is closely coordinated with the 8

EAP work and the

aim is to achieve a fully coherent and integrated outcome, e.g. in terms of approach and

indicators

Meeting the objectives of EU environmental laws and policies: the overview provided by

the Environmental Implementation Review

The Commission and the Member States must ensure that environmental policies and

legislation are enforced and deliver effectively. The Environmental Implementation

Review (EIR) maps the performance of each Member State. To date, two Environmental

Implementation reviews (EIR) have been carried out in 2017 and 2019. The next review,

due in 2022, is expected to highlight further actions required from each Member State in

order to make sure that the EU remains on track to meet its environmental objectives. In

accordance with the mandate given by the European Green Deal Investment Plan

, the

EIR will also identify the investment needs of each Member State in the key sectors of

environmental policy and practice. The zero pollution monitoring will generate a

comprehensive set of data, indicators and assessments that can help inform the next EIR.

COM(2017)312 and SWD(2017)230

COM(2020) 667 final

European Environment Information and Observation Network

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/environment-action-programme-2030_en

Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8

EAP monitoring framework

COM(2020) 21

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Monitoring under thematic strategies



Circular Economy

The monitoring framework developed as part of the first Circular Economy Action Plan

is an inspiration for an integrated and policy-relevant approach. It identified 10 headline

indicators (with 23 sub-indicators) which describe the economic cycle from production,

consumption, waste management to secondary raw materials as well as competitiveness

and innovation. This concept is a useful example to illustrate how complex relationships

and systemic challenges can be captured with a relatively small number of indicators.

However, it does not include any pollution related indicators although the release of

emissions to air, water or soil is one sign of an inefficient economy where resources are

wasted at the expense of affecting our health or our ecosystems. The new Circular

Economy Action Plan announces a revision of the monitoring framework, with new

indicators that will take account of the focus areas in the action plan and of the

interlinkages between circularity, climate neutrality and the zero pollution ambition. The

zero pollution monitoring framework can therefore complement the existing indicators

and this ambition with a measure on how clean we can develop our circular economy.

Coherence between the monitoring frameworks will be ensured to,

support this

transition towards a cleaner, climate-neutral, circular economy by 2050.



Biodiversity

Section 2.2.9 of the Biodiversity Strategy

sets out the ambition level and actions for

reducing pollution in relation to the objectives of that Strategy:

“Pollution is a key driver of biodiversity loss and has a harmful impact on our health

and environment. While the EU has a solid legal framework in place to reduce pollution,

greater efforts are still required. Biodiversity is suffering from the release of nutrients,

chemical pesticides, pharmaceuticals, hazardous chemicals, urban and industrial

wastewater, and other waste including litter and plastics. All of these pressures must be

reduced. […] The Commission will develop a set of indicators for the progressive

reduction of pollution, and will establish baselines to help monitor progress. Pressures

from marine litter and underwater noise are being addressed under the Marine Strategy

Framework Directive.”

The zero pollution monitoring framework will help implement this action. At the same

time, there are ongoing discussions on biodiversity targets and monitoring under

Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD)

which include pollution aspects. These

discussions build on the IPBES global assessment

and the IPBES regional assessment

report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia (ECA)

and

other work in the area of biodiversity and ecosystem assessment

. The aim is to ensure

consistency and synergies between the biodiversity and zero pollution efforts, which then

can also help for the monitoring under the 8

EAP. To achieve this, further work will be

needed to align conceptual approaches and coordinate the variety of ongoing processes.

COM(2020) 380

see pollution-related proposals in recent

SBSTTA-24 document

or the UNEP thought starter on the

linkages between biodiversity and chemicals & waste/ pollution

https://ipbes.net/global-assessment

https://ipbes.net/assessment-reports/eca

E.g.

State of knowledge of soil biodiversity - Status, challenges and potentialities

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

As foreseen in the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, the Commission will also revise the

Soil Thematic Strategy and address soil degradation due to pollution as one of the key

pressures affecting ecosystem services including the capacity of soil to function as a

habitat.



Farm to Fork

The Farm to Fork Strategy

sets a number of important high-level targets that will

contribute to reduce pollution (some of them being common with the Biodiversity

Strategy), namely from nutrients, pesticides and substances with associated antimicrobial

resistance. Monitoring of these targets will be achieved through indicators, which reflect

the use of these products or, in case of fertilisers, the nutrient balance. These indicators

will be an important component of the zero pollution monitoring, but they will not give

an indication in how far the reduction of use results in concentrations in air, water or soil,

which do not cause harm to human health or the environment. The zero pollution

monitoring can inform about these aspects and add to the efforts towards achieving the

agreed goals.



Bioeconomy

The EU Bioeconomy Monitoring System

, pursuant to the EU Bioeconomy Strategy

Action Plan

monitors progress towards the EU Bioeconomy Strategy Objectives at both

EU and Member State level:



Ensuring food and nutrition security;

Managing Natural Resources Sustainably;

Reducing dependence on non-renewable unsustainable resources, whether

sourced domestically or from abroad;

Mitigating and adapting to climate change;

Strengthening European competitiveness and creating jobs.

It builds on existing data from official sources, thus limiting administrative burden on

countries. The monitoring system's conceptual framework is compatible with

International Bioeconomy Monitoring Guidelines and cuts across the five objectives of

the EU Bioeconomy Strategy, the three dimensions of sustainability (environment,

society and economy) and the steps of the value chain, from the underlying ecosystems to

primary production systems, to production, uses and end-of-life. Each indicator in the EU

Bioeconomy Monitoring System is mapped to Green Deal Priorities. Those that are

mapped to the ' a zero pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment' priority are

relating to quality of life in urban areas and the indicator 'environmental impacts’ based

on product-based life-cycle assessment (LCA) and basket of representative products of

the bioeconomy. Although pollution is not a major focus of the EU Bioeconomy

Monitoring System, it does contain indicators about air and water quality under the

heading of ecosystem services.

COM(2020) 381

https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/bioeconomy/monitoring_en

COM(2018) 673

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel



Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability

The Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability

, in line with the European Green Deal,

strives for a toxic-free environment, where chemicals are produced and used in a way

that maximises their contribution to society including achieving the green and digital

transition, while avoiding harm to the planet and to current and future generations. The

strategy sets actions to ensure that all chemicals are used more safely and sustainably, to

promote that chemicals having a chronic effect for human health and the environment -

substances of concern

–

are minimised and substituted as far as possible, and to phase

out the most harmful ones for non-essential societal use, in particular in consumer

products. The industrial transition towards the production and use of safe and sustainable

chemicals a key requisite to achieve a toxic-free environment.

Notwithstanding the EU's world-class knowledge on chemicals' properties and risks,

there is room for improving the knowledgeon the intrinsic properties of a vast majority of

chemicals, and knowledge on uses of hazardous chemicals and exposure of humans and

the environment is fragmented. The Strategy recognises the importance of further

improving the scientific understanding of the impacts of chemicals on health and the

environment, including by monitoring the presence of chemicals in humans and

ecosystems. The Strategy announces that a framework of indicators will be developed, as

part of a wider zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework, in the context of the 8

Environment Action Programme, to monitor the drivers and impacts of chemical

pollution and to measure the effectiveness of chemicals legislation. The Commission will

also establish Key Performance Indicators to measure the industrial transition towards the

production of safe and sustainable chemicals.

In addition, the Strategy

– as part of the ‘one substance, one assessment’ approach –

sets

out a number of important actions in relation to chemical monitoring data, in particular:



making all chemical monitoring data available via the Information Platform for

Chemical Monitoring to ensure their findability, accessibility and interoperability;

making a legislative proposal to removing legislative obstacles for the re-use of

data and better streamlining the flow of chemical data between EU and national

authorities;

extending the principle of open data and the relevant transparency principles from

the EU food safety sector to other pieces of legislation dealing with chemicals;

rationalising the use of expertise and resources by proposing the reattribution of

technical and scientific work on chemicals performed under the relevant pieces of

legislation to European agencies, including work of the relevant scientific

committees;

enabling EU and national authorities to commission testing and monitoring of

substances as part of the regulatory framework when further information is

considered necessary.



COM(2020) 667

These include substances having a chronic effect for human health or the environment (Candidate list

in REACH and Annex VI to the CLP Regulation) but also those which hamper recycling for safe and

high quality secondary raw materials.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Further, the toxicity and use data on chemicals will be consolideted across Agencies and

made availbale for re-use through the open data portal on chemicals. Developing a zero

pollution monitoring will rely strongly on the successful implementation of these actions.

Close coordination with these efforts will be necessary.

Comparison of these existing monitoring frameworks

The purpose and structure of these various monitoring frameworks is different and

therefore it is not surprising that the number and type of indicator varies. For example,

the Green City Accord is working to building on forward indicators for cities to assess

their progress in five environmental areas. However, when extracting the pollution-

related parts of the analysis, it may give the impression that the situation and progress is

somewhat different depending on which framework you look at. For example, Eurostat’s

SDG monitoring indicates a positive or very positive trend for all pollution parameters,

the

EEA’s SOER gives a much bleaker picture with a mix or negative outlook putting in

doubt that many pollution related policy objectives will be met. These apparently

different findings are the result of methodological choices and availability of relevant

data which in themselves are perfectly logic and justifiable but not necessarily helpful in

the EU’s policy debates. The zero pollution monitoring framework will not be able to

resolve all these divergences but may help to create a common reference point, a

platform for coordination and a process towards convergence.

4. Z

ERO

OLLUTION

ONITORING

4.1.

Concept

The monitoring framework can draw lessons from many past and ongoing initiatives that

develop a similar concept for an overarching policy. In particular, the climate monitoring

mechanism

, the Circular Economy monitoring

or the Digital Economy and Society

Index (DESI)

have been sources of inspiration. Amongst the existing pollution

monitoring frameworks, probably the one for air policy is most advanced but many other

areas can also provide lessons for this overarching approach.

Monitoring pollution can be organised in several layers

and dimensions given the

large number of pollutants, sources and endpoints (i.e. affecting different aspects of

health or the environment). To this end, the

hierarchy

set out in the pyramid below

(figure 1) is showing the different levels of granularity of monitoring frameworks.

https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/progress/monitoring_en

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/first_circular_economy_action_plan.html

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Figure 1: Pyramid of levels for different degree of granularity of a monitoring framework based

on indicators, with the 8

EAP monitoring (under development) as an "umbrella framework"

The

headline set of indicators for zero pollution

feeding into the 8

Environment

Action Programme monitoring should not exceed a small number of indicators for

pollution. These few indicators should merely provide a sense of the scale of the

pollution problems that need to be solved. In addition, the ambition is to start building a

zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework on the available data and evidence

which provides a more comprehensive, yet succinct and integrated overview and

monitoring of progress for the zero pollution ambition. A more detailed and specific set

of indicators and assessment is needed for the implementation and enforcement of

legislation and yet more indicators are emerging from research. All of these different

levels of granularity need to be interconnected and logically built on one another.

conceptual representation for the zero pollution monitoring framework

is set out

in figure 2. This illustration looks at the concept more from the perspective of the

‘receptor’, such as humans, biota or various

environmental media. The systemic

perspective of the sources and pressures (pollution levels) is discussed in chapter 4.3.

Moreover, the economic and social dimension, including the possible impacts of

pollution on vulnerable groups or productivity, is desirable to assess.

The identification and monitoring of key impacts (or causing harm) on health and the

environment are a central element in assessing progress towards achieving the vision for

the zero pollution ambition by 2050. Based on this overarching conceptual approach, a

set of initial impact indicator has been proposed in Annex 2 as a starting point to identify

the best indicators for strategic communication as set out above.

Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8

EAP monitoring framework

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Figure 2: Conceptual representation of the Zero Pollution Monitoring Framework

There is certainly no shortage of indicators and the existing indicator libraries

can be a

starting point for discussion. However, it is likely that new indicators may also need to be

developed. The

selection of indicators

will be based on a clear set of criteria, which uses

best available data in the context of the policy objective that is being monitored (see

Annex 2).



They should cover the scope of the zero pollution ambition as set out in the Green

Deal, i.e. address

air/noise, water/marine, soil and consumer products,

when

possible. For each of these four categories, the most relevant ones should be

identified on the basis on either

impact (harm) for human health or impact

(harm) for biodiversity and ecosystems.

A mechanism to identifying the

pollutants with the highest impacts will need to be discussed

The

most important pollutant pressures

(or emissions) to air, water and soil

should be identified.

Some important

emerging pollutants

should be added, again differentiated by

air, water and soil, if possible.

A number of general quality criteria need to be fulfilled, such as timelines,

regularity and the ‘RACER’ (relevance, acceptability, credibility, easiness and

robustness)

criteria (see Annex 2 for details).



The selection of indicators can be based on the approximately 200 available pollution

indicators at EU level. This document makes a number of suggestions and identifies

possible indicators. The rationale for this selection is set out in the subsequent sections

and proposed initial indicators based on the available, most relevant ones has been

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/environment/environmental-indicator-catalogue

E.g. building on examples and experiences from international organisations (e.g. WHO and IPBES)

and relevant research (e.g.

Lancet Commission on pollution and health).

See Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool#41

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

included in Annex 2. However, the final selection will only be done later in 2021

following a consultation and after the work on the 8

EAP monitoring are more

advanced.

At the same time, the weaknesses and shortcomings of the initial indicator set should be

considered from the outset in order to identify actions that will improve existing or

develop new indicators to fit the political need. As a result, Annex 3 provides the starting

point for developing a work programme that will start in 2021 with the aim of delivering

improvements to support the 2024 update of zero pollution monitoring.

The indicators identified for the zero pollution monitoring may be complement with

qualitative analyses derived from available data that may be limited in terms of temporal

and geographical coverage. Dimensions that could be covered by qualitative case studies

include for example indoor air pollution, light pollution or soil pollution and the

integrated impacts of pollution on human and ecosystems health.

The current set of indicators may only address certain pollution types, pathways or

sources. Ideally, more integrated environmental impact indicators should be used such as

the total pollution exposure level on human health, the reduction of human sperm quality

or the decline in insects or pollinators (see section 4.5). Such integrated, composite

indicators already exist to a certain extent for certain types of ecosystems (e.g. good

status as set out below) but they are often not only affected by pollution but also by other

pressures. Further work may be needed to develop such integrated or composite

indicators (see section 7).

It is clear that the conceptual framework will need to evolve with time. Indeed, the

ongoing efforts to standardize natural capital accounting practices at corporate, project,

and government level as well as the related reporting and disclosure schemes that are

being developed in the context of greening the capital markets union could provide

valuable contributions which can be integrated in time.

Finally, the aim is not to increase the administrative burden or to keep it limited for

Member States or even, after some initial investment (e.g. in digital technology,

modelling or processes), to reduce it. At the same time, the weaknesses and shortcomings

should be identified and a gradual process for improvement is started against an

overarching and common ambition level. Where observational monitoring data are

insufficient or not available, a cost-effective way is to use modelling to interpolate or

extrapolate on the basis of the available monitoring results

. This aspect is not explored

further here, but it is an area where digital solutions can help (e.g. big data, artificial

intelligence, remote sensing, earth system modelling)

This will require some additional investments, in particular initially, but it will be

assessed against the benefits that it results in, or synergies with other policies like

climate. In many cases, such investment will be part of improvements of implementation

because many data gaps are a result of incomplete implementation of existing provisions.

This can create synergies and new opportunities, e.g. by introducing better use of

available space-based earth observation data and more advance digital technologies and

processes.

E.g.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.15504

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-00324-3

See SWD (2021) 140

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

4.2.

Monitoring key impacts / harm

Based on available indicators linked to air, water and soil, there are two important

impacts that the monitoring framework needs to capture:

1. key pathways through which air, water (e.g. through drinking water or bathing

water) or soil as well as food and product pollution affect our daily lives and

thereby our health (‘environmental

health & wellbeing indicators’);

2. the wider impact of pollution (and other pressures) on our surface and ground

waters, marine and land ecosystems (‘planetary

boundaries indicators’).

4.2.1. Pollution, human health and well-being

The most relevant known impacts on human health result from air, noise and water

pollution as well as through consumer products. This is encapsulated by SDG 3.9 targets

which aim at the substantial reduction in the number of deaths and illnesses from

hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.

For

impacts from air pollution,

the relevant indicators (e.g. on Years of Life Lived with

Disability or Lost (YLD- YLL) and/or premature deaths) are already widely used.

In addition, the impact of

noise pollution on human health

has been widely proven,

with a range of indicators available to measure and communicate impacts on health

Detailed data on citizens’ exposure and health effects are available at the level of the EU

but because of their complexity they are only updated every five years. Similarly, data

from several water-related directives provide an additional insight to the potential effects

of noise pollution on human health and wellbeing but they are only collected every four

to six years. These initially proposed indicators can be used for a wider assessment and

will, as far as possible, be included in the ‘baseline’ for the first zero pollution

monitoring report. Some of them could be included in other monitoring frameworks (see

chapter 3.3) because these data are collected more regularly by Member States but

currently not transmitted annually to the EU level.

As regards water, the water-related Sustainable Development Goal (SDG6) puts

emphasis on the

access to safe drinking water and sanitation,

which are globally still

affecting health conditions (e.g. compliance with drinking water standards). Data for

these indicators are, in theory, available on an annual or biannual basis but further

arrangements with the Member States are needed (in particular on water indicators) to

ensure that the aggregated indicators can be published annually.

Moreover, the

impact of chemicals through products

including food (in addition to the

exposure of the same chemicals through air, water or soil) is relevant but difficult to

quantify given the large variety of chemicals and products. The same is true for air, water

or soil. For instance, there is a variety of water masses with different spatial / temporal

conditions, as well as a variety of chemicals to quantify. Work is ongoing in the context

of developing indicators for the Chemicals Strategy.

Other indicators

may also be

discussed (e.g. contaminants in seafood or soil pollution and health) but would need to be

at the same level of relevance, importance and availability as the above-mentioned ones.

Health risks caused by environmental noise in Europe

—

European Environment Agency (europa.eu);

Environmental noise in Europe

—

2020

—

European Environment Agency (europa.eu)

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

When using and assessing these indicators, it will be important to also analyse the

exposure of such pollution to different population groups. This can be achieved by

disaggregating the pollution levels data (as well as measuring key pressures) not only

along geographic criteria but also by population groups, including according to income

distribution

4.2.2. Pollution, ecosystems and planetary boundaries

The SDGs set out a number of targets linked to pollution, e.g.:



By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and

minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion

of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse

globally (SDG target 6.3).

By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in

particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient

pollution (SDG 14.1);



Many indicators describing the pollution impacts on the environment and ecosystems are

available but many are not collected or updated on an annual basis.

water and marine ecosystems,

data are transferred to the EU level under the WFD

and MSFD every six years. They are reported into the Water Information System for

Europe (WISE and WISE-Marine),

mostly as “compliance” or “failure” (with some

additional information), but the underlying data are not. Some monthly ocean monitoring

data (e.g. on acidification, nitrates, eutrophication, primary production anomalies) which

are available through the Copernicus marine environment service, even if not all

pollution-specific, can be used as proxies. Most countries also report data separately (as

concentrations in the case of chemicals) into the EIONET Reportnet

system to inform

the regular update of the EEA indicators and which are in turn used to inform

assessments such as the (five-yearly) State and Outlook of the Environment Report

(SOER) of the EEA. From this data flow, a number of indicators are available mainly,

linked to nutrients, but they do not always provide the best indicator for policy purposes.

This annual, voluntary dataflow could be improved and used more effectively for the

purpose of gathering available data to calculate annual updates of key headline indicators

for the zero pollution monitoring framework. Moreover, the evidence base on several

aspects of water and marine pollution is not only temporally scarce, but can also be

spatially incomplete, e.g. with large gaps in spatial data distribution especially in the

southern parts of Europe’s seas

. In addition, in some instances not all pathways are

included, especially sea-based pollutants.

Beyond these annual indicators, assessing pollution effects on ecosystems has been

encapsulated in EU laws in an integrated way with the help of complex assessments

which look at the ‘status’ of the different ecosystems.

See e.g.

EEA Report 22/2018

https://www.eionet.europa.eu/reportnet

See EEA report on ‘Contaminants

in Europe’s Seas’

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

The objectives are to:



avoid negative impacts on land through the favourable conservation status of

protected areas on land;

avoid negative impacts on surface and ground waters as defined by the Water

Framework Directive (WFD) through ‘good status’ of coastal, transitional

(estuarine), rivers, lakes as well as aquifers and

avoid negative impacts on seas and the ocean as defined by the Marine Strategy

Framework Directive (MSFD), through the ‘good environmental status’



The indicators attached to these objectives are mostly linked to impacts but some also to

state or pressures. They are important composite indicators aggregating a larger number

of specific indicators based on explicit legal requirements. They are essential to monitor

the ecosystem health and promote the long-term development of ecosystems towards a

sustainable state. However, they go beyond pollution-related issues, as they are the result

of many pressures on the environment. In some cases, it would be possible to extract

those elements of the composite indicators which are directly linked to pollution

pressures. For example, for the marine environment only use data for the descriptors 5

(nutrients), 8 (hazardous substances), 10 (marine litter) and 11 (underwater noise); for

surface and ground waters use only chemical status). Future use of big data may help to

extract the fraction of impact caused by chemical pollution, as is already done to assess

impacts of chemicals on human health.

As regards

soil pollution,

no ecosystem-related impact indicator exists yet, but the

concentration of certain contaminants (e.g. heavy metals, some pesticides) in the soil is

monitored in a harmonized way across the EU by the

Land Use Cover Area Survey

(LUCAS SOIL)

. The progress in the management of contaminated sites is also

reported by EEA-39 countries on an ad-hoc basis in the context of the EIONET. Also for

soil indicators, it should be considered how soil pollution data collected under LUCAS

and EIONET could be further enhanced and developed into one or more indicators.

Ideally, these should also reflect the combined levels of chemical pollutants in soil, and

impacts on soil ecosystems including microbiota. To capture these opportunities, EEA

and EIONET have prepared a soil indicator and threshold framework, while the Joint

Research Centre has launched the EU Soil Observatory

, which hosts pan-EU datasets

on diffuse soil pollution. Under the umbrella of the EU Soil Observatory, the Joint

Research Centre (JRC) is developing a soil pollution dashboard. Both EEA and JRC

cooperate closely in the EIONET National Reference Centres (NRC) on Soil.

These initially proposed indicators can be used for a wider assessment and will, as far as

possible, be included in the ‘baseline’ for the first

zero pollution monitoring report based

on the WFD and MSFD reporting in 2022 as well as the latest LUCAS SOIL results. For

updates afterwards some additional efforts will be made to access those data in Member

States which are collected more regularly and by further development of a targeted

pollution module in LUCAS Soil, which is integrated with MS monitoring programmes.

SWD(2020) 62

https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/eu-soil-observatory

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

A process for improving data availability and quality of water and marine data will be

started through a supporting project

In addition, the mission Soil Health and Food will be instrumental in view of developing

and harmonising soil monitoring systems in Europe, based on a set of commonly agreed

set of soil health indicators, one of them being “presence of pollutants, excess nutrients

and salt”.

In addition, the National Emission reduction Commitments Directive 2016/2284 requires

the monitoring and reporting of

ecosystem impacts of air pollution,

on a four-year

basis. Reported data provide information on air pollution impacts through acidification,

eutrophication and ozone damages on a representative network of terrestrial ecosystems

(including freshwater ones).

Increasingly, the potential of using

complementary data source,

in particular from

Earth observation, e.g. hyperspectral data from the EU Copernicus Hyperspectral

Imaging Mission for the Environment (CHIME) mission, offer a potential to overcome

these shortcomings for many datasets. Moreover, the Information Platform for Chemical

Monitoring (IPCHEM)

aims to provide access to all available in-situ chemical

monitoring data directly from the sources (e.g. Member States), including some steps to

ensure quality control when combining datasets. IPCHEM provides access to chemical

monitoring data across media, i.e. in environmental media (waters, sediments, soil,

biota), humans, food and feed and products. More investment in IPCHEM, especially to

finalise consolidation of all chemical monitoring data flows through this platform in least

aggregated form, will help deliver new data and indicators useful for the zero pollution

monitoring. In particular, monitoring results may be combined with effect and impact

data on humans (e.g. diseases) and environment (e.g. status of biodiversity and

ecosystem health), hence providing a holistic view of the impact of combined exposure

to chemicals through various routes on humans and the environment. The monitoring

data may be also used for the back-calculation of pollutant emissions to water and other

environmental compartments, hence for the monitoring of progress on the control and

phasing out of pollutants of concern

. The activities of the IPCHEM should be

streamlined with the European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet)

and

with the Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring Service

, not only to pursue more

frequent update of indicators but also to achieve integration of the pollution data with all

the other available information and data on the marine environment. EMODNET and

Copernicus Marine already include a wealth of data regarding the state of the marine

environment and of multiple pollutants, and the responsible coordinators are in constant

collaboration with MSFD actors and the EEA to increase this knowledge base and make

more data openly available. In order to have more regular updated indicators, these

sources may need to be used to update existing indicators more regularly or develop new

indicators (or proxies for the key indicators) that can be published on a more frequent

basis.

A project on ‘Streamlining & digitalisation of water and marine monitoring & reporting’ is about to be

launched.

https://ipchem.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

E.g.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969718352471

https://emodnet.eu/en

https://marine.copernicus.eu/

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Many pollutants

travel from the soil to air and/or water or accumulate in plants and

animals,

including marine waters and ecosystems (biota). Transfers of such pollution can

travel long distances even in remote areas. It will be increasingly important to develop

indicators that consider these cross-media transfers and assess impacts in an integrated

and holistic way, and that also consider its economic and other impacts (‘co-benefits’ or

cross media relevance).

4.3.

Monitoring key pressures and sources

Pollution pressure indicators complement the above-mentioned set of key impact

indicators by including all point sources, which result in emissions to air, discharges to

water or contamination of soil. Moreover, they account for losses or diffuse pollution

which affect air, water or soil in the absence of an identified single point of pollution as

they rather affect an area (e.g. spraying of pesticides, nitrates). They are based on a wider

set of pollution source-related indicators, which give a measure of how the pressures

from certain types of pollution evolve.

Overall, there are a

large number of pollution types, groups or individual pollutants

which can theoretically be covered. Such point and diffuse pollution pressures may be

collected through inventories or registers (e.g. the E-PRTR)

although many are not

captured by the current databases and require to step up efforts to ensure better

knowledge is available

. In addition to such legally-recorded sources of pollution,

unknown pollution also occurs, such as illegal dumping or unrecognised pollutants.

For an integrated pollution monitoring, it will be important to capture emissions,

discharges and losses across the media and link them to the sources of the pressures.

Knowing the sources allows to better understand the drivers and develop measures to

eliminate or reduce pollution. Such a systemic approach has been proven very useful in

the context of the climate and energy policy

or the material flows in the circular

economy. However, despite many years of monitoring and aiming to address this issue,

our knowledge is still somewhat poor for some questions linked to pollution

100

Figure 3 illustrates the ineffectiveness of our material flows and how a circular economy

is essential to reduce or even eliminate emissions into air, water and waste (see losses in

the top right of the diagram). A similar Sankey diagram exists for nitrogen flows along

the EU food system

101

100

101

Greenhouse gas emissions are not covered by this monitoring framework. However, some pollutants

have climate and other pollution effects, e.g. methane, so they may be covered here as well whilst

ensuring consistency and complementarity with the climate monitoring.

European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register

E.g. on pesticides:

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/estimating-pesticide-use-across-eu

See

example of energy flows

E.g.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/chemicals-in-european-waters

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912420300213

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Figure 3: Material flows in the EU economy

–

Sankey diagram (EU-27, 2018)

102

Monitoring pressures is also important to assess trends and, if desirable, setting pollution

reduction targets. At the moment, only few such targets can actually be set and more

efforts are needed to assess, comprehensively, all pollution pressures.

Initially, the focus could be a limited number of pollutants to concentrate efforts and

showcase the benefits of such an integrated approach. The first round(s) of the zero

pollution monitoring exercise(s) focus on:



Nitrogen (including its specific emissions of NO

, NH

, etc.) & Phosphorus

(linked to the fertiliser, air emissions and eutrophication targets);

Selected active substances used in pesticide or their metabolites (linked to the

pesticides targets);

Particulate matter (linked to the air emission targets);

Heavy metals (e.g. mercury linked to the Minamata Convention, lead or copper as

fungicide)

A subset of industrial chemicals (linked to hazardous chemicals)

103

;

Coastline / beach litter (linked to single use plastics).

In particular, the inventories are advanced and complete as regards air pollution. For

pollutants from industrial installations a detailed system of activities and a longer list of

pollutants exist, but targeting only some phased out substances of very high concern.

This will further improve with the revision of the related legal instruments (mainly IED

and EPRTR). For nutrients, a large number of data exist, although they are not always

integrated or available for the whole of the EU (e.g. the total nutrient discharges of rivers

102

103

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/circular-economy/material-flow-diagram

Building on the efforts under the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

into the sea exist for the Baltic and the North-East Atlantic but not the others). Less

information on pollutants may be available at EU level for other media (water, soil) or as

regards pollution transfers across other sectors. But work is ongoing in several areas.

Building on these prioritised pollutants, an initial proposal of indicators would be made

and updated regularly. In parallel, a process for improving data availability and quality

will be started. In addition, it will be important to develop pressure indicators for other

types of pollutants, such as pharmaceuticals (in particular antibiotics used in animal

production and those to be developed in the context of water policy, see Annex 2, Part E)

or ammonia, and to take into consideration initiatives such as the EU Methane

Strategy

104

. More generally, there will need to be a reflection on which pollutants can be

added at this stage and for which pollutants work is needed to develop new indicators.

This should include identifying where further research will be needed in cases where the

relevance is not proven yet and the available data or evidence is not yet sufficient for

including these indicators in the zero pollution monitoring framework.

One essential aspect is to improve the availability of data and indicators including the

collection of additional data. The feasibility of establishing reduction targets will need to

be analysed for each pollutant group. In particular, for pesticides and industrial chemicals

(i.e. those covered by REACH) this will be challenging given the several hundreds or

thousands of individual substances, respectively, that would need to be considered.

Alternatively, focus on emblematic and exemplary pollutants (e.g. PFAS)

105

could be

explored. Once a baseline for the total EU emissions has been set for one particular

pollutant type, it should be possible to break it down per country or per sector

106

. If not,

this should be a desirable action to complete in the coming years. This can help to give

an indication whether in a particular country or sector is reducing pollution in general or

only for some pollutants. This will be essential information to focus actions and

investments in a country- and/or sector-specific way. Overall, the more granular the data

are (e.g. also for regional level), the better for policymaking.

4.4.

Monitoring key drivers and responses

Once the pressure (or result) and impact indicators are established, it will be important to

identify which inputs (e.g. financing, resource needs, etc.) and outputs (e.g. plans,

programmes, measures, actions, policy options, etc.) are most effective to achieve the

agreed targets and objectives. In other words, administrations at EU and national level

need to reflect on the direction of public investment, the application of certain legal and

non-regulatory tools and the incentivisation (e.g. through taxes and financial taxonomy

for sustainable investments) to achieve pollution prevention or reduction. Such

assessment would also take into account socio-economic impacts of pollution reductions,

either in terms of productivity gains or losses or impacts on jobs, prices, taxes, etc. At the

same time, instruments can be analysed which would result in achieving the zero

pollution ambition most effectively, e.g. environmental taxes, cuts of harmful subsidies

or application of the polluters pays principle. Such information is also useful to define

need for action by the private sector, for example in partnership with public authorities in

104

105

106

COM(2020) 663

Work is already ongoing in the context of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability to address these

questions.

Examples already exist for some pollutants (e.g. the work on reactive nitrogen through the UNECE

task force).

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

the context of sustainable finance activities including the ongoing work on the taxonomy

for sustainable finance

107

Such assessments typically feature in Commission’s impact assessments for a particular

piece of law. However, a systematic, integrated approach for such evidence or even the

development of specific input and output indicators is not well developed. If analysed per

Member State (e.g. through the Environmental Implementation Review) it would allow

for a tailor-made political dialogue with Member States to identify gaps and delays and

discuss practical solutions on how the EU could help overcome them. For example, if the

investment in pollution reduction infrastructure is not sufficient, available Cohesion

Policy Funds, the Common Agriculture Policy or European Investment Bank (EIB) loans

could be used. In addition, the Recovery and Resilience Facility could further support

Member States to improve the pollution reduction infrastructure provided that they

included relevant investments and reforms in their respective national plans.

The EU Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action

108

has

introduced a mechanism for a systematic approach for assessing actions (outputs) taken

by Member States and providing recommendations on how to address remaining

implementation gaps. In the context of this regulation, recommendations and guidance

were issued to Member States as to ensure a strong environmental dimension of the

national energy and climate plans (NECPs). In particular, Member States were asked to

reinforce the links with national, regional or local plans for air pollution reduction, such

as the National Air Pollution Control Programme (NAPCP), and relevant air quality

management plans. A similar approach is envisaged for governance under the

Biodiversity Strategy. Building on existing requirements under the Governance

Regulation, further discussions are needed to identify and further develop a synergic and

cross-cutting zero pollution approach also taking into account reflections in the context

of the 8

EAP. In order to widen the approach taken under energy and climate laws and

build on the ongoing reporting and implementation efforts (e.g. under the Environment

Implementation Review–EIR), further reflections for the development of an

“Environmental Implementation Indicator Framework” should take

place to improve the

systematic assessment of input and output indicators. Until now, no indicators linked to

policy actions or drivers has been identified. They should be considered in the future as

they react faster to change than the impacts and pressures.

4.5.

Innovative research initiatives monitoring pollution in an

integrated way

Beyond these media specific indicators (and exposure routes), research efforts are

underway to develop a more integrated assessment of pollution affecting the environment

and our health. In particular, the following initiatives are worth mentioning:



The

European Human Exposome Network

109

: nine projects funded by

Horizon 2020, the EU Framework for Research and Innovation (2014-2020),

created a network in 2020, to address issues such as exposure to air pollution,

noise, chemicals, light, urban stressors etc. and study the related health impacts.

The projects will provide new evidence for better preventive policies and a

107

108

109

In the context of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088

Regulation (EU) 2018/1999

on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action

https://www.humanexposome.eu/

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

toolbox for policy makers to work with collected data and use it for evidence

based decision-making.



The European

Human Biomonitoring initiative

(HBM4EU)

110

: This initiative,

co-funded by Horizon 2020, is coordinating and advancing human biomonitoring

in Europe and generating evidence on the actual exposure of citizens to a number

of priority chemicals

111

, identified by EU regulators, agencies and member state

stakeholders for their regulatory relevance. Building on this initiative, the

Partnership for the Assessment of Risk from Chemicals

(PARC) will

continue the work under Horizon Europe. It aims to be an EU-wide research and

innovation programme to support EU and national chemical risk assessment and

risk management bodies with new data, knowledge, methods, networks and skills

to address current, emerging and novel chemical safety challenges. It will

facilitate innovation in chemical risk assessment to better protect human health

and the environment.

The EU funded

SOLUTIONS

112

(Solutions for present and future emerging

pollutants in land and water resources management)

project addressed the

challenges related to the contamination with complex mixtures of environmental

pollutants and provided consistent solutions for the large number of legacy,

present and future emerging chemicals posing a risk to European water bodies

with respect to ecosystems and human health. In addition, it provided a large

number of improved tools, models, and methods to support decisions in

environmental and water policies. For instance, a data infrastructure to compile

and exchange environmental screening data on a European scale was established,

as well as, an integrated effect-based method for diagnosis and monitoring of

water quality that allows to better characterise the likelihood that complex

mixtures of chemicals affect water quality.



In addition, there are other ongoing research networks which look at urban health, testing

and screening endocrine disruptors and human exposure to micro- and nano-plastics

113

Moreover, Horizon Europe Work Programme 2021-2022 includes dedicated research and

innovation actions to support filling knowledge and modelling gaps in the integrated

assessment of pollution and research will cover many different pollutants

114

All these initiatives are ongoing and can contribute to the first zero pollution monitoring

and outlook report to complement the indicator-based assessment. Ideally, these

initiatives will result in a more harmonised data generation allowing for the better use

and re-use of data for indicator generation.

Information on the environmental burden of disease provides an integrated measure of

the impact of pollution on health, in terms of specific disease outcomes, DALYs and

premature deaths, with high communication potential. A number of initiatives are

underway at international level to calculate the environmental burden of disease

115

, with

110

111

112

113

114

115

https://www.hbm4eu.eu/

Substances currently prioritised are: Aniline family, Bisphenols, Cadmium and chromium VI,

Chemical mixtures, Emerging substances, Flame retardants, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

(PAHs), Per-/poly-fluorinated compounds, Phthalates and Hexamoll® DINCH, Acrylamide, Aprotic

solvents, Arsenic, Diisocyanates, Lead, Mercury, Mycotoxins, Pesticides and Benzophenones.

https://www.solutions-project.eu/

https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/health-research-and-innovation_en

https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/environment_en

Global Burden of Disease (GBD 2019) | Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (healthdata.org);

The Lancet Commission on pollution and health - The Lancet

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

both pollutant and country-specific data held by the World Health Organization and

subject to update

116

Another integrated assessment of human and ecosystem health is increasingly mature is

the ‘Consumption

Footprint’ project.

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) developed the

Domestic Footprint indicator that addresses such environmental impacts from a territorial

and a consumption perspective at the Member State and EU level for the period 2000-

2018 and the Consumption Footprint indicator addressing consumption-based impacts at

the Member State and EU level for the period 2010-2018. These indicators are available

on the

Consumption Footprint Platform

117

The establishment of

planetary boundaries for pollution

may be an effective and

appealing way to select a limited number of headline indicators and translate the capacity

of the planet into indicators that can drive change and monitor progress. The original

research by

Rockstroem et al.

118

has included several pollution-related boundaries (other

than climate change), in particular those linked to

interference with the global

phosphorus and nitrogen cycles, aerosol loading

and ‘introduction of novel entities’

which includes

chemical pollution.

The latest update by the group of scholars

119

has

developed the concept further and re-defined some of the planetary boundaries. Since

then, the EEA

120

and the JRC

121

have worked extensively to explore on how this concept

can be applied in the EU policy context and within Horizon Europe there will be research

opportunities to develop and trial

“Regional

nitrogen and phosphorus load reduction

approach within safe ecological boundaries. In particular for nutrients, it should already

be possible to determine a ‘planetary boundary’ indicator which could be used in the EU

context, e.g. in the Integrated Nutrient Management Action Plan. Also the above-

mentioned JRC work on environmental footprinting of EU production (Domestic

Footprint) and consumption (Consumer Footprint and Consumption Footprint)

122

uses

the planetary boundaries as absolute sustainability reference and shows significant

promise. This could result in the identification of some headline indicators (e.g. on

nutrients) for a high-level assessment of pollution. Moreover, this could also help

developing indicators for assessing the spill-over of pollution through imports of goods

from outside the EU, another important dimension in a holistic and integrated pollution

monitoring approach.

There are a number of established or emerging monitoring systems that could be used

even more for the determination of an integrated and combined impact of pollution on

the ecosystem. On the one hand, the regular

LUCAS monitoring

(Land Use/Land

Coverage Area Frame Survey) includes the only harmonised soil assessment of the EU. It

covers all land cover types at same time at the currently 22,000 location of soil data

collection (41,000 in 2022). In addition to heavy metals, the JRC also has performed a

first pilot of harmonised survey of certain pesticides in EU soils (over 100 active

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

Public health and environment (who.int)

https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sustainableConsumption.html

Rockström, W. Steffen, et al.

(2009): ‘Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for

humanity. Ecol. Soc. 14, 32.

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/

Steffen et al. (2017)

: ‘Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet’.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855

2020 EEA report

‘Is

Europe living within the limits of our planet?’

E.g. ‘Environmental sustainability of European production and consumption assessed against planetary

boundaries’ (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720306186)

2019 JRC report:

‘Indicators

and assessment of the environmental impact of EU consumption’

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

substances and metabolites from 3,300 sites). Other pollutants may be monitored (e.g.

POPs ((N)PAHs, dioxins and furans, PCB, HCB), PFAS, microplastics) if additional

budget would become available. This monitoring certainly provides a valuable input to

zero pollution monitoring. However, further discussion is needed on the continuation,

expansion of the scope, timing and funding of the survey so that it can feature regularly

in zero pollution monitoring and address the knowledge gaps (see section 4.2.2). A

proper legal basis at EU level for the LUCAS survey could secure the future of the

survey in the long term. The JRC is also using LUCAS samples to characterise the soil

microbiome through genetic analysis as a tool to define soil health (e.g. response to

pollutants).

An emerging source of pollution-related data is the

monitoring of pollinators

(e.g.

bees). A number of research and preparatory projects are ongoing that collect data on

pollutants that are accumulating on honeybee bodies or in honeybee products (honey,

pollen, wax etc.). The Commission is currently implementing a pilot project

INSIGNIA

123

, which is developing protocols for monitoring pesticides in the

environment using honeybees. A follow-up preparatory action is planned for 2021, which

will look to expand the monitoring scope (heavy metals, air pollutants and other

pollutants but also microplastics

124

) and roll out the protocol across the EU. This action

will help to set up a regular monitoring and indicator system, which could be integrated

into the zero pollution monitoring framework.

Other monitoring initiatives that can help to link the state of terrestrial ecosystems and

pollution pressures are

EMBAL (European Monitoring of Biodiversity in

Agricultural Landscapes) and EU Pollinator Monitoring Scheme

125

. The former is in

pilot phase, while the latter is the subject of discussions between the Commission and

Member States in the context of the implementation of the EU Pollinators Initiative

126

Once fully implemented, these monitoring initiatives would provide data on the state of

biodiversity in agricultural landscapes and the state of pollinator populations, which

could be linked to land management and potential current and future sources of pollution

(in particular the use of pesticides and the surplus of fertilisers). Similarly, the IPBES

pollinators assessment

127

provides input to such an approach.

Finally, the

analytical framework proposed by IPBES

(theory of change) could be

explored further. It focusses on the outcomes, i.e. healthy environment (ecosystems) and

healthy people, and then identify the target actions needed to reduce the impact of

pollution, which will be in terms of reducing air pollutants emissions and deposition

(across media), and improvement of the condition of terrestrial (forest, agroecosystems,

soil, urban), freshwater and marine ecosystems.

Another element is the

impact on the ecosystem services

(i.e. eutrophication is

impacting water quality with a cost associated). Also the first

EU-wide ecosystem

assessment

128

is a milestone assessment and has many indicators and assessment ideas

123

124

125

126

127

128

https://www.insignia-bee.eu/

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144481

https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/display/EUPKH/Data+and+information

EU Pollinators Initiative (COM(2018)

395)

https://ipbes.net/assessment-reports/pollinators

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120383

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

which could be factored into a more integrated approach. Together with the advances in

Natural Capital Accounting

129

, this would help to combine the overall effects of

pollution with the consequences for the different economic sectors, in particular through

the condition accounts. This would allow to use these accounts to monitor the decline or

recovery of ecosystem services hence the economic effects of pollution. The Commission

(Eurostat) is currently working on legislation on ecosystem accounts. Similarly, efforts to

further develop the application of the System of Environmental Economic Accounting to

the ocean environment

130

With all these initiatives and projects, the question is on how to make them operational

for the purpose of zero pollution monitoring. This will be discussed in the next stage of

the work.

5. Z

ERO POLLUTION OUTLOOK AND FORESIGHT

In addition to the monitoring framework which covers the current observations and past

trends, a forward-looking or foresight dimension is valuable for policy making

131

. For

this, a number of methods are available as illustrated in the figure 4. In relation to the

zero pollution ambition, applying an outlook and a foresight method is particularly

interesting. Both will be further explored. .

These two methods and related outputs will be different in nature and purpose. The

Zero

Pollution Outlook

will project the observed pollution trends into the future by using

modelling tools. It may develop scenarios which compare different situations, such as

where no further actions are taken (‘baseline’

or ‘business-as-usual’

scenario) are

compared to alternatives, or specific

policy scenarios

with additional or more

stringent/ambitious measures, under different socio-economic or climate mitigation and

adaptation backgrounds. Such outlook reporting is already common in the climate and

energy policies. In particular, Member States produce their own outlooks which are then

shaping their national and EU policies in the context of the Regulation on the

Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action

132

129

130

131

132

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/capital_accounting/index_en.htm

Technical Guidance on Ocean Accounting (oceanaccounts.org)

COM(2020) 493

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-strategy/national-energy-climate-plans_en

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Figure 4: Definition of different types of forward looking analysis

133

When developing any model-based scenarios, it is important to highlight that they

represent a different approach than just forecasting the monitoring results. Models are

based on assumptions and have limitations. Uncertainty associated to the output of the

models is also essential. They have to be communicated clearly and the underlying data

and computation must be open and transparent.

Already in 2005, the EEA produced a 'European environment outlook' report

134

which

provided a combined forward-looking and scenario-based assessment of climate change,

air pollution and water pollution. Since then, the EEA developed these approaches

further and presented the latest evidence in their 2020 State and Outlook of the

Environment Report

135

. Other tools such as online viewers

136

can provide additional

information (the wider public included) and complement forward-looking analyses. For

instance, a floods viewer juxtaposed with maps of industrial installations and sensitive

ecosystems can help in identifying points with a chance for pollution episodes where

additional measures might be needed to avert flooding.

Since 2018, there is also a

Clean Air Outlook

137

building on the work undertaken in the

preparation (impact assessment) for the NEC Directive

138

. The intention for a Zero

Pollution Outlook report (to be published first in 2022) is to build fully on this Clean Air

Outlook but go beyond air pollution.

133

134

135

136

137

138

Based on Zurek, M., Henrichs, T. (2007). Linking scenarios across geographical scales in international

environmental assessments. Technological Forecasting & Societal Change 74, 1282-1295.

EEA Report No. 4/2005

https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer/2020

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/explore-interactive-maps#c0=5&c5=&b_start=0

COM(2018)466

and COM(2020)3

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/review.htm

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

In 2022, the intention is to publish also a

Clean Water and Marine Outlook’.

Modelling work is already ongoing for many years mainly in collaboration with the Joint

Research Centre. The Blue2 project has developed some interesting results, which we

can build upon

139

. Since 2020, the Blue2.2 project is ongoing which aims at defining the

business-as-usual scenario and further more ambitious policy scenarios, in particular in

relation to nutrient pollution, contaminants and litter

140

in rivers, lakes, coastal and

marine waters. Some alignment of parameters with the air pollution modelling will be

made. The results of this project will directly feed the Impact Assessment for the revision

of the UWWTD, the review of the MSFD and form the basis for a first ‘Clean Water and

Marine Outlook’ report in 2022.

The development of a

Clean Soils Outlook

could complement the implementation of the

Soil, Biodiversity and Farm to Fork Strategies. While it may be too early to have a

comprehensive soil dimension by 2022, discussions are ongoing about how existing

instruments and initiatives (e.g. the ongoing European Soil Condition Assessment,

LUCAS Soil) can support an outlook assessment for soils.

In addition to the modelling and integrated assessment tools discussed above, the

strategic foresight

is becoming increasingly important. The Commission has published

its first

Strategic Foresight Report

141

in 2020 focussing on resilience. An important

contribution of this report is that it provides a definition of resilience, i.e. the ability to

not only withstand and cope with challenges, but also to transform our Union in a

sustainable, fair and democratic manner. The report identifies how major trends are

evolving, and seeks opportunities for change that will help Europe rebound from the

crisis. Overall, it encourages the use of foresight more systematically in all policy areas

and announces a Strategic Foresight Agenda with a regularly updated Work Programme.

In line with this agenda, a systematic, cross cutting

foresight capacity for zero

pollution

could be developed in the areas of air quality, water, marine, soil, chemicals,

ecosystems policies etc. Such exploratory foresight activity would try to explore trends

and developments (and breaks in current trends and developments) in a more qualitative

way using longer term prospective tools (often referred to also as ‘horizon scanning’).

Such foresight can help strengthen the ability to deal with 'unexpected' developments and

foster 'thinking outside the box'.

A foresight methodology

142

has been developed in the context of the

‘foresight for the

environment’ (FORENV) activities

in the context of the Environment Knowledge

Community (EKC)

143

. For the third FORENV cycle, the Commission services have

launched a dedicated ‘Zero

Pollution Foresight activity’

as part of the wider

Commission’s Strategic Foresight agenda (see Annex 3 for details) and will report on its

findings as part of the 2022 Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook report.

In addition, several Commission services are engaged in some specific initiatives.

Moreover, the

‘Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability’

announced that intention to

139

140

141

142

143

E.g.

JRC report

(2019): “Water quality in Europe: effects of the Urban Wastewater Treatment

Directive”

An interesting and inspiring example on marine litter and plastics are available at:

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2020/07/23/breaking-the-plastic-wave-

top-findings

COM(2020) 493

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/risks/pdf/emerging_issues_methodological_framework.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/environment_knowledge_en.htm

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

increase the EU’s strategic

foresight on chemicals in the context of key value chains and

dependencies (where chemicals are important building blocks) as well as the

development of an ‘EU early

warning and action system for chemicals to ensure that EU

policies address emerging chemical risks as soon as identified by monitoring and

research’.

6. D

ATA

KNOWLEDGE NEEDS AND DATA MANAGEMENT

Overall, data technologies have evolved significantly and there are many new, digital

solutions which can and will allow for more efficient and effective data generation and

management. The general trends and emerging technologies are explored in the related

document on ‘Digital Solutions for Zero Pollution’

144

As mentioned earlier, the development of the monitoring framework will initially be

based on the available data and indicators. In most cases, making better use of other data

sources using modern digital technologies will be sufficient and no new or more frequent

data will need to be collected. However, in some cases no data will have actually been

collected and

further efforts will be needed to underpin policy making.

In addition,

some of the monitoring data suffer of shortcomings in the findability, accessibility,

interoperability and sometimes too restrictive use rights and some reporting and

collection flows are multiplicative

145

. The exercise will therefore provide an opportunity

to identify and coordinate the data and knowledge needs and take coordinated steps to

meet them.

The uptake of

new digital technologies

(e.g. wireless on-chip fluid sensors) is an

accelerator for cost-effective monitoring of surface water, groundwater and domestic

wastewater. Leveraging on such (networked) sensor technologies new (revolutionised)

continuous water quality monitoring system can be introduced in Member States over the

coming years. Other innovative monitoring technologies, e.g. consisting of satellite data

and automated monitoring technologies that collect and measure environmental DNA (e-

DNA ), also have great potential to improve data collection, reduce the costs of

monitoring and enhance confidence in water status classification. In combination such

modern (digital) water management technologies would e.g. allow water managers to

better: a) monitor the quality of their water reserves in real time; b) predict the evolutions

of the water reserves; c) act proactively to better align water reserves with demands.

One underexploited resource is the harvesting of

available data that are held with

national authorities but are not used for EU level policy making

(yet) (e.g. some data

are available at farm level but not collected in most Member States and generally not

accessible or data from national contaminated sites registers)

146

. In this respect, the

INSPIRE Directive offers the opportunity to request and use data ad hoc by using the

Data Sharing Regulation (No. 2010/268)

147

and to further promote the active

dissemination of environmental geospatial data through data services. The availability for

public reuse and the accessibility of environmental data and earth observation data will

144

145

146

147

SWD(2021) 140

Therefore the application of the FAIR principles (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) to

all environmental data is promoted.

To address this, the Commission proposes to collect annual statistics on the use of pesticides in

agriculture, based on the professional use records held by farmers under Regulation (EC) 1107/2009

(see COM(2021)37).

See procedural guide for data request using Commission Implementing Regulation No. 2010/268

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

be accelerated by the Implementing Act on High Value datasets under the Open Data

Directive

148

that is planned for adoption in 2021. The European Marine Observation and

Data network (EMODnet) operates with this as one of its main priorities and further

actions are taken at the level of the Member States to further support it.

Moreover, in the Data Strategy

149

and the Digital Europe Programme as well as the EU

Open Data Portal, there are opportunities to use modern technologies to tap into available

data sources but this has still to be exploited. These initiatives will help improve data

availability in general terms and promote the effective use and application of artificial

intelligence. The key initiative is

the creation of a “European Data Space”, through

Common European data spaces in strategic sectors and domains of public interest. In this

context, the Commission will support the establishment of a

Common European Green

Deal data space,

to use the major potential of data in support of the Green Deal priority

actionsand the zero pollution ambition is listed as an area for developing dedicated pilot

exercises. The Copernicus program already transitioned to cloud technologies to make all

satellite data and information products available digitally

150

. Embedding the zero

pollution monitoring framework within a larger commitment to digital cooperation may

help further capitalise on the opportunities provided by the adoption of an environmental

governance digitalization strategy based upon a range of contributions and collaboration

between national governments, the private sector and civil society.

In this context, the UN’s “Global Commitment for Digital Cooperation” offers also wide

scope for improved environmental data governance. One relevant initiative is related to

the implementation of a “Digital Ecosystem for the Environment”, a robust architecture

and governance framework consisting of four elements: a) raw data, b) a supporting

technological infrastructure, c) algorithms and analytics; d) insights and applications

151

Another initiative is UNEP’s World Environment Situation Room (WESR)

152

- a one-

stop digital platform to access environmental data and information. The WESR platform

on pollution will help address knowledge and implementation capacity gaps by

aggregating such tools and assessments, and empowers policy makers, partners, and

stakeholders to address pollution in a responsible and environmentally sound manner.

Furthermore, the use of

Earth observation

(e.g. by using Copernicus data

153

or the

‘Destination Earth’ initiative) is critical to address and overcome data gaps. The specific

use of Copernicus services data and information in the context of a regular monitoring

and forecast initiative will support in the different domains of air, water, marine and soil

ecosystem. The Copernicus is an operational programme since 2014 and it will continue

to provide data and products for routine daily or sub-daily environmental monitoring for

next decades. The space component will enhance its observational capacities with new

Earth Observation missions

154

and the six services will continue and evolve operationally

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1024/oj

COM(2020)66

Data and Access Information Service (DIAS)

https://un-spbf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Digital-Ecosystem-final-2.pdf

https://wesr.unep.org/

E.g. through the

Data and Access Information Service (DIAS)

The Copernicus Carbon Dioxide Monitoring mission is one of Europe’s new high-priority

satellite

missions and will help to measure how much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere

specifically through human activity.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

to provide value added products, observations and forecasts, in the years to come

adapting to new requirements arising from the zero pollution goals.

‘Destination Earth’ initiative

(a “digital twin for the planet”) may be adopted as

planning and sustainability optimisation tools which may support the assessment of

environmental state and pollution impact for both

the “human health” and “ecosystems”

domains. A digital twin of the ocean is contemplated on the basis of proposals made by

the Horizon

Mission “Healthy Oceans and Waters”.

Local Digital Twins are also

powerful means to improve the resource management and decision-making of cities and

communities in order to, for example, pursue their zero pollution ambitions. The

forthcoming Digital Europe Programme will support the creation of an EU toolbox for

deployment of Local Digital Twins, the piloting and validation of the data space on

climate-neutral and smart communities (as part of the Green Deal Dataspace) and to

implement concrete activities for the massive adoption of AI-enabled solutions in cities

and communities.

The key value of the

“digital twins”

approach is its ability to combine real-time data,

models and intelligence from different platforms to simulate, predict and improve

decision-making

– critical elements for the “outlook and foresight” exercises. “Digital

twins” should cover land-based

pollution as well as the marine/maritime component, and

their impacts on the atmosphere, terrestrial ecosystems, freshwaters and the marine

environment. The project is going to start in 2021 but will only be a tangible support to

the zero pollution monitoring and outlook after 2022.

In the context of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, the actions under the ‘one

substance, one assessment’ process will further facilitate and consolidate access to

available data on chemicals monitoring. The

Information Platform for Chemical

Monitoring

(IPCHEM) has been developed to become a single access point for the

chemical occurrence data in all media across the EU. It is a decentralised platform,

providing remote access to existing information systems and data providers. Several EU

authorities are sharing their data already through this portal and increasingly, national

authorities connect their national databases. The IPCHEM and its governance will be

further developed as part of the work on Common Open Data Portal on Chemicals to

ensure that all chemical monitoring data are made accessible through the platform. In

addition, a proposal will be made to streamline the flow of chemical monitoring data in

the environment through the relevant EU Agencies and to accelerate move from data

reporting to data harvesting. Further, obstacles for the re-use and sharing of monitoring

data will be removed to ensure that once data are provided to EU institutions they can be

re-used for multiple purposes and no repetitive reporting/collections occur. IPCHEM can

be also used to connect data that are also requested under the above-mentioned INSPIRE

mechanism (see Annex 4). Meanwhile to ensure data quality and representativeness,

resources need to be allocated to take the necessary quality control steps when bringing

data sets together.

Two dedicated projects also offer opportunities to facilitate access to available data in a

particular domain. Regarding

marine pollution, the EMODnet

provides data and data

products on all the relevant descriptors, related to the marine environment, free of access

and strictly follow INSPIRE standards. EMODnet and the Copernicus Marine

Environment Monitoring Service (CMEMS), the Commission’s long-term

initiatives

regarding marine observation (in-situ and satellite plus modelling respectively) are going

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

to provide the basis for the development of a Digital Ocean Twin and will participate

actively in the activities of ‘Destination Earth’

155

. In this context, the integration of the

marine component is an important element to be considered from the outset. In addition,

cooperation on marine data with international partners could also help fill the knowledge

gaps, as demonstrated by the operational and scientific collaboration between EMODnet

and the National Marine Data and

Information Service (NMDIS) supported by the EU’s

Partnership Instrument

156

Finally, the use of citizen science in the context of the zero pollution monitoring should

also be further explored. Citizen science data has the potential to sensibly contribute to

the implementation of the monitoring framework. However, while they can fill the

increasing demand for high-resolution spatial and temporal data, work is still needed to

build acceptance for this non-traditional data source. To this end, concrete

recommendations and actions to facilitate the uptake of citizen science data are provided

in the Commission’s Staff Working Document ‘Best practices in citizen science for

environmental monitoring’

157

, which also includes examples (best practices) of citizen

science for different types of pollution.

7. G

OVERNANCE

MILESTONES AND DELIVERABLES

The implementation of this Zero Pollution monitoring and outlook framework will

require a clear and effective governance of all partners at EU level involved in the

preparation of the outputs as well as all partners in the Member States who are data

owners and users at the same time. Such a governance will build work of other existing

governance systems

158

and establish close coordination, as necessary, to create synergies.

Following the adoption of the Zero Pollution Action Plan, a dedicated outreach and

consultation with partners outside the EU institutions and bodies will be organised in

2021, mainly with Member State experts but also international organisations and other

interested parties.

This Staff Working Document provides a starting point and suggestions for the concept

and the indicators for a zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework. Consultations

will take place throughout 2021. This will result in a decision on the indicators and

evidence base to be used for the preparation of the first report in 2022. This will also feed

into the finalisation of the zero pollution contribution to the 8

EAP monitoring.

In parallel, Commission services and key partner agencies

159

will establish a coordination

mechanism that brings together the best competences and expertise and ensure the

cooperation towards the combined efforts to establish the monitoring and outlook

framework step-by-step.

155

156

157

158

159

See details in SWD(2021) 140

Supported by the EU-funded

International Ocean Governance: Strengthening international ocean

data through the EU's ocean diplomacy

project. See

https://www.emodnet.eu/en/eu-china-

partnership-sets-pace-international-marine-data-sharing

SWD(2020) 149

E.g. under the Energy Union Governance or the Biodiversity Strategy

in particular the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the

European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) as well as

others

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

The key milestones and deliverables are:

For 2022

The first

‘Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook’

report

will be published by the

European Commission. It will provide a synthesis of the findings of various data sources

and ‘thematic’ reports, in particular

the following which will be an integral part of the

report:



Zero Pollution Monitoring:

‘Pollution affecting Health and Biodiversity’

(working title) presenting the results of the indicators and assessment listed in this

SWD.

Zero Pollution Outlook including:

Clean Air Outlook

Clean Water and Marine Outlook

Clean Soil Outlook

160



Zero Pollution Foresight

(i.e. the outcome of the FORENV project).

A number of stand-alone

‘thematic’ or ‘technical’ reports can and should be published

around the same time by the knowledge partners directly. The list can evolve during the

consultation process but some examples are already given here, in particular:



Zero pollution monitoring by Copernicus

Key results of

pollution-related research linked to health and ecosystems

based on the reports including pollutants of emerging concern (e.g. ultrafine

particles or light pollution) from EU-funded R&I projects;

Key results from the

assessment of the final National Energy and Climate

Plans

(as published in 2020) including on issues such as biodiversity and air

quality.



Other relevant reports published by other international organisations will also be

considered, e.g. the UNEP pollution summary report as a deliverable of the

Implementation Plan “Towards a Pollution-Free Plan”.

In addition to these reports, a

Zero Pollution online portal

will present selected

indicators which can be regularly updated by the European Environment Agency. The

nature and set up will depend on the decision taken regarding the European Green Deal

Dashboard and the 8EAP monitoring system which could ideally integrate the zero

pollution dimension in these wider communication tools. Finally, a joined up

communication strategy will be developed through the zero pollution website

161

will be

proposed.

2023

Follow-up on gaps identified to improve 2024 assessment and update indicators, if

possible.

Including state of play including trends in heavy metals and nutrients in agricultural soil and

contaminated sites

161

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en

160

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

For 2024 and beyond

It will be important to identify shortcomings and develop new indicators or data flows

already now so that they are ideally ready for use in 2024. Hence, a preliminary, non-

exhaustive list of new elements for the further development of the zero pollution

monitoring and outlook framework is listed in Annex 2, Part E.

Once the indicator set for the monitoring framework has been agreed, the question of

aggregating or simplifying the available indicators, at least for communication purposes,

may arise. It is attractive to consider the development of

a ‘zero pollution index’ or

‘composite indicator’ as is the case for many other policy areas

162

. Alternatively, a

simplified ‘zero pollution scoreboard’

163

compiling and classifying the various indicators.

8. C

ONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS

The development of a zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework is a challenging

but worthwhile undertaking. It is clear that a more integrated approach offers the

opportunity to get a more holistic and overarching view on the scale of the pollution

crisis and the pathways towards solving it successfully. It also calls for joining forces and

making best use of the available competencies and efforts as well as share good practices

across policy domains. The interactive and cooperative preparation of this document has

already highlight the needs, the potential and the opportunities that can be harvest from

the overarching approach but also in driving and inspiring specific developments and

improvements in certain policy domains (e.g. on soil or under the Water Framework

Directive).

This document is, however, only a starting point which intends to initiate a wider

discussion, a dedicated consultation and collaborative process that involves all actors and

partners. It combines the joint thinking of all Commission services and associated

agencies and reaches out to experts from Member States, social partners, industry,

academia and civil society to contribute to these efforts. Moreover, dedicated dialogue

with international organisations and partners working on similar initiatives based on the

global ambition of the Sustainable Development Goals and the related international

agreements will take place, in particular with UN organisations, multilateral

environmental agreements and regional organisations (such as UNECE or the regional

sea conventions).

The Commission services will collect feedback and input to the ideas presented in this

document through dedicated workshops linked to the Zero Pollution Stakeholder

Platform and the wider consultations for the development of the monitoring framework

for the 8

Environment Action Programme

164

. Moreover, the various work strands will

be developed further between the Commission services and the associated agencies to

have a rolling work programme with the first milestone in 2022, the presentation of the

first set of Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook reports. Building on these experiences

and closely linked to the policy needs and wider efforts under the European Green Deal,

this framework will evolve and aim at contributing towards achieving the zero pollution

ambition.

162

163

164

E.g. the

Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI)

E.g.

EU Justice Scoreboard

Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8

EAP monitoring framework

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

ANNEX 1: N

EXHAUSTIVE OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT TARGETS AND OBJECTIVES FOR

POLLUTION SET OUT IN

POLICIES AND LAWS

1. O

BJECTIVES AND TARGETS SET OUT IN THE

ERO

OLLUTION

CTION

LAN

(

SEE DETAILS IN

COM(2021) 400)

VERVIEW OF OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS IN OTHER

REEN

EAL INITIATIVES

WITH RELEVANCE FOR THE ZERO POLLUTION AMBITION

ARM TO

ORK

TRATEGY

(COM(2020) 381)

AND

IODIVERSITY

TRATEGY

(COM(2020) 380)

Nutrients:

50% reduction of nutrient losses by 2030. The target shall ensure that there is

no deterioration in soil fertility and will lead to 20% reduction of the use of fertilisers.

Pesticides:

By 2030, 50% reduction of the overall use and risk of chemical pesticides

and 50% reduction of the use of more hazardous pesticides.

Anti-microbial Resistant (AMR) substances:

50% reduction of overall EU sales of

antimicrobials for farmed animals and in aquaculture by 2030.

HEMICALS

TRATEGY FOR

USTAINABILITY

(COM(2020) 667)



Safe and sustainable production and use of hazardous chemicals

Industrial transition to safe and sustainable chemicals

Substitute and minimise the presence of substances of concern

Phase out the most harmful substances, particularly in products and for vulnerable

groups

High level of protection of human health and the environment

In addition, the reduction of pollution by unit of use is set out in the wider product policy

(in addition to REACH) including Directives on Eco-Design or EU Eco-label.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

3. O

VERVIEW OF KEY ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES IN

LAWS FOR

AIR

NOISE

WATER

MARINE AND SOIL

Pollution type

Air Quality

Target / Objective

Compliance with EU

air quality standards

for

several

air

pollutants

Reduction of harmful

noise levels

Deadline

Several

deadlines

depending

on the air

pollutant

Ongoing

EU policy / law

Ambient

Air

Quality Directives

Comment

EU air quality standards

cover

both

highest

concentration and average

exposure levels for human

health

Noise

pollution

Environmental

Noise Directive,

Outdoor

Noise

Directive, MSFD

Nitrates Directive,

Groundwater

Directive, WFD,

MSFD

Water Quality

–

nutrients

Compliance

with

limit value for nitrates

groundwater,

phosphate threshold

value required in MS

for

groundwater;

surface

water,

eutrophication

objective

Status compared with

undisturbed

conditions

Several

deadlines

depending

legislation

Water Quality

–

biological

quality

elements

Water Quality

–

chemical

pollutants

2015

(extensions

to 2021 and

2027

possible)

2015

(extensions

to 2021 and

2027

possible,

beyond that

for

recent PS)

2020

(exceptions

possible)

No deadline

Water Framework

Directive (WFD)

Compliance

with

environmental quality

standards (EU level

for PS; MS level for

RBSPs, groundwater

quality standards )

Water

Framework, EQS,

and Groundwater

Directives.

Marine

environment

Achievement of good

environment

status

for several pollutants

Reach

favourable

conservation

status

for

species

and

habitats

importance

Marine Strategy

Framework

Directive

Habitats & Birds

Directives

nutrients, contaminants,

marine

litter,

energy

including

underwater

noise

One important pressure is

pollution

Species

and

ecosystems

Soil Pollution

Reduce soil pollution

and make progress in

the identification and

remediation

contaminated sites

No deadline

EAP, Soil

Thematic

Strategy,

Biodiversity

Strategy towards

2030

No specific target to date

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Pollution type

Soil pollution

Target / Objective

Limits

the

concentration

heavy

metals

agricultural soil to

which sewage sludge

is applied.

Deadline

No deadline

EU policy / law

Sewage

Sludge

Directive

Comment

Several baselines for

heavy

metals

exist

(aggregated and modelled

LUCAS Soil, GEMAS,

ICP Forests, country-

level), however, data

cannot be separated for

sites where sludge is

applied.

LUCAS Soil is carried out

periodically every 3-4

years,

continued,

evaluated and expanded

according to policy needs,

e.g. possibly to cover

more pesticides residues

and/or metabolites thereof

and other substances of

concern.

Soil pollution

Pesticide residues and

other substances of

concern

No deadline

Sustainable Use

Pesticides

Directive

JRC is currently exploring

the potential of LUCAS

soil to develop a baseline

of pesticide residues for

agricultural soils.

LUCAS could be easily

adapted to assess other

substances of concern.

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

4. O

VERVIEW OF KEY OBJECTIVES FOR SPECIFIC POLLUTION SOURCES IN

LAWS

Pollution type

Air Polluting

Emissions

Target / Objective

Percentage

reductions

for

several pollutants

Deadline

2020-29 and

2030 onwards

EU policy /

law

National

Emission

reduction

Commitment

Directive

Urban Waste

Water

Treatment

Directive

Water

Framework

Directive

Comment

Emissions

Water

Compliance

emission

values for

waste water

with

limit

urban

The environmental objectives

of certain waterbodies may be

such that the emission limit

values required for urban waste

water agglomerations are more

stringent than those under the

UWWTD

Emissions to air, water, soil as

well as waste

Industrial

emissions

Minimising

industrial emissions

by applying BAT

and contributing to

water

and

air

quality standards

Compliance

with

sulphur in maritime

fuel requirements

Reduction

sulphur content in

non-SECA areas

Accelerate rate of

reduction of NOx

emissions

from

ships

2030

Ongoing

Sulphur

Directive

Emissions

from

the

maritime

transport

sector

Emissions to air

Extension of SECA areas to all

EU areas

Amendment

Directive

Sulphur

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

ANNEX 2: I

NDICATIVE LIST OF PROPOSED INDICATORS

ERO

OLLUTION

ONITORING

RAMEWORK

TATUS OF THE ANNEX

TO BE EXPLORED FOR THE

This annex presents an initial proposal for the selection criteria as well as some selected

candidate indicators to be used in the context of the first zero pollution monitoring

framework. Further discussions will be needed before finalising the selection. After each

cycle, further improvements and developments can be made in the light of the lessons

learnt and the evolution as regards indicators and assessments in the various policy areas.

NTRODUCTION

An indicator is a characteristic or attribute that is measured regularly in order to help

assess to what extent an objective has been met.



Impact indicators measure global or long-term

effects of the Commission’s

interventions.

Result indicators measure the initial or intermediate effects of the DG's

interventions.

The proposed list of indicators is indicative and aims at triggering a discussion to identify

the best list illustrating the most important dimensions of the zero pollution agenda. It

will need to be ‘fixed’ in the end of 2021 to allow preparation of the first

Zero Pollution

Monitoring Report. However, it will be reviewed and constantly improved with the

intention to update the list for the second round of preparing the zero pollution

monitoring in 2024.

ELECTION CRITERIA

Building on the Better Regulation Guidelines, two criteria are particularly relevant for

this exercise:



Frequency

–

the indicators should be updated annually, or at least every two

years (although exceptions are possible for very relevant indicators)

Timeliness

–

the data should refer to recent periods, so that the results of action

taken under this Commission can be demonstrated (as much as possible, and with

all reservations linked to the long-term impact of environmental action).

This is currently not necessarily the case for all available indicators, in particular as

regards water and marine pollution. In addition, the selected indicators should be, to the

extent possible, ‘RACER’

165

, i.e.:

(1)

Relevant,

i.e. closely linked to the objectives to be reached. They should not be

overambitious and should measure the right thing (e.g. a target indicator for health care

could be to reduce waiting times but without jeopardising the quality of care provided).

(2)

Accepted

(e.g. by staff, stakeholders). The role and responsibilities for the indicator

need to be well defined (e.g. if the indicator is the handling time for a grant application

and the administrative process is partly controlled by Member States and partly by the

EU then both sides would assume only partial responsibility).

(3)

Credible

for non-experts, unambiguous and easy to interpret. Indicators should be

simple and robust as possible. If necessary, composite indicators might need to be used

165

See Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool#41

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

instead

–

such as country ratings, well-being indicators, but also ratings of financial

institutions and instruments. These often consist of aggregated data using predetermined

fixed weight values. As they may be difficult to interpret, they should be used to assess

broad context only.

(4)

Easy to monitor

(e.g. data collection should be possible at low cost).

(5)

Robust

against manipulation (e.g. administrative burden: If the target is to reduce

administrative burdens to businesses, the burdens might not be reduced, but just

shifted from businesses to public administration).

Moreover,

data quality

and

completeness

are important. Quantitative indicators should

be used whenever possible (e.g.

amounts, averages, percentages, rates, ratios or

indexes).

Where qualitative indicators are used, they should be objectively verifiable.

For some pollution aspects, there are also

different type of data

available, not all with

the same quality, accuracy and granularity. Building on the rather advanced system of

data tiers established within the climate monitoring mechanism

166

, it may be meaningful

to develop such a

tiered approach on data quality and robustness

across all pollution

monitoring to allow the use of different types of data, from qualitative (lowest tier), to

high quality quantitative data (highest tier) with a mechanism to improve data quality

towards the highest tier. To illustrate the approach, the definition of three tiers in the

IPCC guidelines

167

is set out below in table 1.

Table 1: Illustration for definitions for different tier data, based on IPCC

Tier

Definition

Simple first order approach–spatially coarse default data based on globally available

data

–large

uncertainties

–methods

involving several simplifying assumptions

A more accurate approach–country or region specific values for the general defaults

–

more disaggregated activity data

–relatively

smaller uncertainties

Higher order methods–detailed modelling and/or inventory measurement systems

–data

at a greater resolution

–lower

uncertainties than the previous two method

SE OF THE INDICATOR LIST

The selected indicators can be used in the two main products namely:



Zero Pollution online portal

(which can be part of a wider dashboard for the

EAP or the Green Deal) presenting and visualising online in a user-friendly

way the indicators in Part A.

Zero Pollution Monitoring Assessment

(which can also be embedded in

wider reports under the 8

EAP progress monitoring or the SOER) using

indicators in Part A, and C the indicators and assessments mentioned in Part D

(which are not available annually).



It is also important to establish a baseline, ideally with data from the year 2020, allowing

an assessment of the progress made in the run up to 2030.

166

167

See

Commission Implementing Regulation 2018/2066

https://www.ipcc.ch/

kom (2021) 0400 - Ingen titel

Finally, Part E includes a list of indicators and improvements to develop in the future,

which will be translated into work programme coordinated across all zero pollution

dimensions.

ART

A: M

ONITORING TARGETS

As set out earlier, the Zero Pollution Acton Plan and other European Green Deal

initiatives have identified a number of targets for 2030 and many additional targets and

objectives exist in EU law (see Annex 1). The monitoring of these targets is one main

purposes of the monitoring framework. These targets are associated to indicators for

impacts or pressures. The available indicators linked to the established targets have been

included below.

ART

B: K

EY HEADLINE INDICATORS ON IMPACTS

HARM

EY HEADLINE

- I

NDICATOR

INDICATOR

EFERENCE

(

DATA SOURCE

)

OMMENTS

(

TO EXPLORE

)

Impacts on human health

Health impact

from

air

pollution

a) Years of Life Lost (YLL) due

to PM2.5 (or premature

deaths)

b) Exposure to PM2.5

concentration in exceedance

of the standards set in clean

air legislation

Health impact

from

water

pollution

EEA (?)

Linking

socio-

economic

status,

possible, building of

ESTAT

and

EEA

work

EEA (CSI004)

a) Proportion of population using COM / EEA

drinking water which does not

meet requirements of the

Directive

Available annually only

from 2023 onwards

(new Directive),

2022, data from current

Directive if critical.

Explore analysis of

specific pollutants (e.g.

PFAS,

pesticides,

nitrates)

b) Bathing sites with excellent

water quality

c) Proportion of urban waste

water which does not meet

requirements of the Directive

(collection/ secondary

treatment)

EEA (CSI022/