sou · GWB348EN · 2009-01-01 00:00:00 — Research must focus on reducing this uncertainty and on helping to solve environmental problems. Forms of dialogue between scientists, policy-makers and industry need to be developed. 3Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish authority 3.1The EU (MSD) The purpose of the EU (MSD) is to develop a cohesive EU policy for protection of the envi- ronment. The Directive has been drafted in accordance with pro- posals in the EUs sixth Environmental Action Programme and will be adopted by Parliament and the Council in 2008. A holistic approach to protecting the environment has not been developed by Commission or by nationally before. Neither have the other Baltic Sea countries taken a cohesive approach to protective measures in the environ- ment. The MSD is therefore expected to lead to extensive changes as regards the status of environmental issues in all the countries affected. 3.1.1The objectives and purpose of the directive The overarching aim of the MSD is to achieve good envi- ronmental status within the EU by 2020 at the latest. According to the proposal, the term environmental status refers to the general state of the environment in the sea, considering in particular the structure, function and processes of ecosystems. Intro- ductory 8 and 44 in the directive stress that programmes of measures must be founded on an ecosystem-based approach. According to introductory 3, the directive should form the environmental pillar in the EUs future policy. Introductory 9 explains that the cohesive regulatory frame- Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. work of which the directive consists should contribute to coher- ence between different policy areas and promote the integration of environmental issues into other policies, such as the Common Fisheries Policy, the Common Agricultural Policy and other rele- vant community policies. In this way, a much greater number of community regulations than before will be relevant for the protec- tion of the environment. One of the main purposes of the MSD is to help fulfil the communitys and Member States obligations and undertakings in accordance with several applicable international agreements on protecting the environment from pollution. Considering that many of these international agreements lack both effective mechanisms for implementing legal requirements on the national level and a supervisory authority, the directive will play an impor- tant role in this respect. 3.1.2Marine regions and programmes of measures Under the MSD, European regions shall be established as management units for implementation. The Baltic Sea and North Sea (including and ) constitute regions in accordance with this classification. strategies shall be developed within each region, and each country shall also draft its own strategy which will cover the steps included in the common strategy. The countries surveys, analyses and propos- als for programmes of measures shall be reviewed and approved by Commission. No established environmental quality norms or measures on the EU level have been defined in the MSD. Responsibility rests instead on the Member States to cooperate within their respective sea areas, and on non-EU countries who also share common sea areas. These strategies shall result in the implementation of specific programmes of measures developed with regional consid- eration. The process for establishing the measures stipulated in the MSD includes, in chronological order, assessment of the state of the environment, of environmental objectives, and introduction of monitoring programmes for continual assessment and regular updating of the state of the envi- ronment, and programmes of measures designed and implemented to achieve good environmental status. SOU 2008:48 Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. Action Plan (BSAP) is the programme of measures that will be applied first and foremost by the EU Member States in the Baltic Sea area to try to jointly achieve the long-term aims established in the directive. The MSD covers more areas than those focused on in the BSAP, however. The directive aims to achieve good environ- mental status, which means that all relevant focus areas for the environment are dealt with, whilst the BSAP is limited to those areas which the countries were able to agree on for special measures. Supplementary efforts will therefore be needed. Table 3.1 lists the components included in the implementation of the MSD in chronological order. Several of these shall be imple- mented within three years from when the Council adopts the directive, whilst others must be implemented before 2020. The table also shows which Swedish actors should be responsible for implementation. Table 3.1 Tasks according to the EU (MSD) and proposed allocation of responsibility for implementing the directive Article in the directive Responsible actor(s) strategies and pilot projects Determination of good environmental status Exceptions (where good environmental status is deemed impossible to achieve) Recommendation for Community action Interim report to the Commission Public consultation and information Incorporation into Swedish law Government/Swedish Parliament Notes: authority refers to the authority appointed nationally to be responsible for imple- menting the MSD. See Section 3.3. Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. 3.1.4Joint international management strategy Within the framework of the MSD, a joint international manage- ment strategy shall be developed by the countries within the regions. The directive provides some guidance as to the content of such a strategy. It is a question of, for example, ensuring that the countries within each region employ similar envi- ronmental monitoring methods so that results are comparable and of jointly estimating the degree of human impact on the environment and identifying potential conflicts of interest in the sea areas. Otherwise, it is not possible to work out the extent to which the joint management strategy should be based on joint efforts and measures, or whether it should rather be primarily designed in a joint process to guarantee a high degree of concor- dance between the various countries approaches. 3.1.5Option of creating pilot projects under the EU (MSD) Since the process, according to current reports, will not be com- pleted until 2020 at the latest, the option of creating pilot projects for the more rapid of programmes of measures for areas in need of emergency action and to implement stricter pro- tection measures has been introduced into Article 5. Furthermore, it is stated that the Commission may consider offering supportive action in such cases. This means that countries that choose to bring forward their programmes of measures in this way have the opportunity to serve as models in relation to other areas. 3.2Relation to other policy areas One long-term objective of the MSD is to make issues a guiding principle for other policy areas that concern the environment, in particular fishing and agriculture. Such an inter- sectoral perspective is currently only employed sporadically when solving problems, and the integration of environment issues into all EU policy areas is therefore considered highly desirable. The directive mentions that measures regulating fisheries manage- ment should only be taken within the framework of the Common Fisheries Policy, but that the environmental impact of fishing SOU 2008:48 Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. should be considered. It is further stated that discharges and emis- sions resulting from the use of radioactive material are only regu- lated in Articles 30 and 31 of the . The agricultural policy is mentioned in introductory 9, which deals with coherence between different policies and fostering the integration of environmental concerns into other policies. Apart from the agri- cultural policy, reference is not made to any other policy areas that will be more directly affected by the directive, although it is rea- sonable to assume that industrial policy will be the most affected. The Commission has taken the initiative to develop a European policy, within which the MSD is supposed to deliver the environmental pillar. One of the purposes of the policy is said to be to increase dialogue between environmental policy and industrial policy. Through its communication An integrated policy for Union, the Commission has laid down the foundations for the future policy.1 The communication constitutes a form of action plan for the industry, although without the dignity of a white paper (which contains concrete proposals). The communication does not incorporate legislative proposals but provides instead proposals for project cooperation and proposes a roadmap up until 2009. The recommendation to Member States is that they should have developed national plans for their issues before then. The Commissions influence on policy is limited, however; most EU Member States do not wish to see a comprehensive community policy in the area. Governance from the EU Commission consists primarily of it calling on Member States to create national strategies and fostering the use of common tools to deal with issues. The communication on a European policy is the first step on the road to creating consensus among countries in the area, and the likelihood is that such a process will stretch over many years. 1 An integrated policy for Union. COM(2007) 575. Communication from the Commission to Parliament, the Council, European Economic and and . Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. 3.2.1The principle of subsidiarity and the MSD The MSD aims to even out the differences between Member States as regards important aspects concerning management of the environment. This applies to e.g. definitions and assessment prin- ciples as well as the knowledge base in general and data in particular. Introduction of the directive will therefore increase cooperation between countries in the Baltic Sea area within several areas. The principle of subsidiarity is applied in the issue of more everyday, practical management measures. What measures should be implemented in order to guarantee good environmental status in the future is to be decided primarily by the individual countries. Knowledge exchange between countries will furthermore be important to keep them informed and updated about each others systems, efforts and priorities on the management level. The con- cept of joint management, or regional cooperation as men- tioned in the MSD, can refer to the development of both joint management plans and common tools (such as survey data) as well as the of jointly agreed objectives. It is unclear, however, how far-reaching countries can agree to be regarding joint management and how much importance they intend to attach to the concept. Among the proposals in the com- munication regarding the new European policy is that the coast guards of neighbouring countries should develop a joint management strategy to a greater extent. Baltic Sea countries, such as and , do not see this type of joint action on the basic management level in such a positive light. They refer in par- ticular to the potential legal complications of inter-authority coop- eration between countries in that one countrys legislation cannot be given precedence over another. The added value or cost savings such cooperation might lead to become a secondary issue as long as these legal stumbling-blocks remain, they think. There is currently no legal framework that allows cooperation between countries in any binding form, apart from in a few cases where it has been possible to set up transfrontier local authority associations to deal with a public administrative task. The Euro- pean Grouping of Territorial Cooperation, EGTC, is also a new legal instrument within the EU allowing local and regional bodies, etc., from EU Member States to create cooperative groups in the form of legal entities.2 The possibility has been introduced to facili- 2 Regulation 1082/2006/EC, European Parliament and the Council, 5 2006. SOU 2008:48 Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. tate transfrontier cooperation. EGTC creates its own structure, owns assets and employs personnel. The principal aim of EGTC is to implement projects for territorial cooperation within the EU, which implies that the efforts are mainly of a temporary and experimental nature. Cooperation on management issues between the Baltic Sea countries has until now mostly taken place within the framework of the EUs Interreg projects. These projects aim in many cases to test models of cooperation and joint management between coun- tries within a specific problem area. The initiatives are often of an innovative and intersectoral nature. Today, there are many exam- ples of how a joint approach to the management issue has been adopted by central agencies, municipalities, regions and organisa- tions in the Baltic Sea area. Knowledge about the opportunities and limitations of joint management cooperation is as yet limited, how- ever. 3.2.2Preparations prior to the MSD in other Baltic Sea countries All EU Member States in the Baltic Sea area feel they now have the necessary organisation to be able to implement the MSD. What is required as a first step is for one or more authorities to be identi- fied or nominated as competent for implementation. All the coun- tries concerned will do this during 2008. All of them also say that integration between land and sea is very important for future environment work. How this will be reflected in the organ- isational structure as a result of the changes to be introduced has yet to be decided, however. Accordingly, the link between the Water Framework Directive and the MSD has not been determined either. The MSD is expected to take longer to implement in some countries than others. Some countries dont expect to be able to establish the national plans that have to be introduced within three years of the directive being adopted. Several countries also express pessimism as regards the directives target of achieving good environment status by 2020, especially for the Baltic Sea. Many feel that, at the very most, it might be possible to fully establish the programmes of measures by that time. Furthermore, a few of the objectives specified in the BSAP should be met as early Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. as 2016, something which several countries are even more sceptical about. It is mostly the emission ceilings for phosphorus and nitro- gen, defined in the BSAP, which several countries are sceptical about. 3.3A Swedish central authority responsible for implementing the EU (MSD) I propose that the (Swedish EPA) be appointed as the authority responsible for the implementation of the MSD and overall management in . The Swedish EPA shall formally consult other rele- vant agencies regarding issues to do with implementation of the MSD. The Swedish EPA shall also be responsible for supplying the spatial planning authority (, and Planning), as proposed by the Inquiry, with collected national planning data on the landscape (see Chapter 4). Under Article 7 of the MSD, Member States shall designate the authority or authorities competent for its implementation. The authority will be given extensive powers. It shall, among other things, develop and continuously monitor implementation of the national strategy to which the has committed itself through the MSD. From the beginning, the remit of the authority is, in partnership with other Baltic Sea countries and North Sea countries (that bor- der on and ), to establish factors that character- ise good environmental status in the areas with appurtenant criteria, as well as methodological standards that enable compari- sons between regions. Environmental objective and pro- grammes for continuous monitoring shall also be developed so that regularly evaluation can be carried out. Member States shall there- after establish and implement programmes of measures for high SOU 2008:48 Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. environmental status based on the precautionary principle and the principle of preventive action. The Commission shall be able to assess concordance in the measures among the countries, which is why regular and detailed reporting is of key importance. The authority shall be the coordinating party for implementation of the MSD in . This implies primarily monitoring imple- mentation of the systems and functions established in accordance with the directive. Implementation of the directive demands good coordination as regards laws and regulations. The Swedish struc- ture for environment management is however split among several different authorities. Work is currently coordinated mostly through SAMHAV, a coordination group consisting of heads of authorities responsible for environment issues. SAMHAV does not have any formal powers, however. The authority shall be specifically responsible for: Monitoring the implementation of the MSD in general and sub- sequent reporting to the EU. Monitoring the Swedish environmental quality objective A Bal- anced , Sustainable Areas and Archipelagos, and Swedish environment policy in gen- eral. Commissioning background data and some reporting to the EU and HELCOM. The authority shall coordinate the collection of data from all feasible stakeholders who are in this field, whereupon an important focus will be on land-based emissions. Coordinating environmental monitoring. Coordinating sectors and highlighting the ecological aspect of strategic resources issues prior to the application of future EU policy. Participating in international projects concerning these issues. Fish resources shall to the best possible extent be incorporated in the overall efforts to protect the environment. The authority shall have the ultimate responsibility for fish as a Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. natural resource as a result of its holistic responsibility for bio- diversity in the sea areas. The authority shall also cooperate with the water authorities on issues concerning the integration between land and sea. The Swedish EPA is the central authority competent for the implementation of Swedish environmental policy. There are how- ever several actors who fulfil important functions in envi- ronment management and who therefore could be designated authorities competent for implementation of the MSD. Alterna- tively, the responsibility could be divided between two or more competent authorities. follows a study and discussion of which authority/authorities might be most suitable for the task, based on their current remits. (Swedish EPA) The Swedish EPAs remit is to ensure the implementation of envi- ronmental policy decisions on an overarching level. According to its instructions, the Agency is responsible for guiding other cen- tral, regional and local authorities in environmental and supervision issues, to pursue cases in the courts and to follow how the Envi- ronmental Code is developing. remit also includes proposing amendments to legislation and other environmental policy instruments, monitoring and reporting on the state of the environment, initiating research and managing protected areas, and so on. shall be a driving and unifying force in Swedish environmental work by guiding, coordinating, monitoring and evaluating environmental and supervision work in relation to authorities with a special sector responsibility for achieving 15 environmental quality objectives and other central, regional and local authorities. The Swedish EPA shall also, in accordance with the proposal put forward by the inquiry, be responsible for issues relating to the integration of land and sea in cooperation with the water authorities. SOU 2008:48 Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. Within the Swedish EPA, there is the , which acts a coordinator to facilitate fulfilment of the environmental quality objectives. is tasked with reporting to the Government on how work to achieve the objectives is progressing and where necessary iden- tify additional measures. is responsible for overall coordination of and allocation of funding to environmental moni- toring activities and monitoring of the environmental objectives. can also be found within the Swedish EPA and is an advisory body in environment issues. The Swedish EPA also convenes and chairs SAMHAV. The proposes that these two bodies be amalgamated into one environment council (see Chapter 5 in the Swedish edition for more details concerning this proposal). is the government authority responsible for the exploitation and preservation of fish resources. It draws up legislation and long-term management plans for fishing and aquaculture and conducts research on fish, fish con- servation and fishing as well as develops methods and equipment. participates at level in negotiations on fishing issues. It also has the overarching responsibility for Swedish fisheries control. shall con- tribute to ecologically and socially sustainable food production. Fishing issues are currently poorly integrated into other issues in . The EU fisheries policy gives the community exclusive decision-making powers in the area, which is why action is difficult to take outside these frameworks. Com- mission has recently established a combined directorate for fisher- ies and issues, DG Affairs, to achieve better subject integration. The , for exam- ple, has established the and Fisheries Directorate within its central government administration, with the aim of ensuring that policies are integrated as regards the entire subject area of affairs. Intergovernmental cooperation on the environment and a Swedish .. The Swedish Meteorological and () is the central authority for meteorological, hydrological and oceano- graphic issues. shall administrate and develop information about weather, water and the climate and through this provide rele- vant actors with a basis for their decision-making. shall be a resource in Swedish environmental work and supply background data for planning and decision-making for activities that are dependent on the weather and water. SMHIs remit includes conducting subsidy-funded activities, performing assignments for other authorities and business activi- ties on commercial terms. General forecasts and warnings, sector- oriented services, simulations and analyses, statistics, climate stud- ies and research assignments are some examples. also out regularly monitoring of the environment in offshore areas, and is the national data host for oceanographic and biological environmental monitoring data. has five water districts with a county administrative board acting as the water authority in each one. The water authority is responsible for water management in the district. The water authorities have the overall responsibility for ensuring the imple- mentation of the EU Water Framework Directive in . Water management focuses on drainage areas and covers all surface water and groundwater. When the MSD is implemented, coopera- tion between the competent authority for the environment and the countrys water authorities will be of key importance since action to reduce land-based emissions will be central to achieving the directives quality targets by 2020. Proposing the water authorities as competent for the implementation of the strategy directive has not been on the agenda. The county administrative boards, who are responsible for envi- ronmental monitoring on the regional level, should continue to have this responsibility once the MSD has been implemented. Close cooperation between the county administrative boards and the authority is therefore required.