A4-0347/98

Resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on a European Community biodiversity strategy (COM(98)0042 - C4-0140/98 and SEC(98)0348 - C4-0155/98)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission's communication (COM(98)0042 - C4-0140/98),

- having regard to the first report on the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity by the European Community (SEC(98)0348 - C4-0155/98),

- having regard to Article 130r(2) of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to the Convention on Biological Diversity,

- having regard to the Dobris report by the European Environment Agency,

- having regard to Council Decision 93/626/EEC on the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity ((OJ L 309, 13.12.1993, p. 1.)),

- having regard to its opinion of 25 June 1993 on the Commission's proposal for a Council Decision on the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity ((OJ C 194, 19.7.1993, p. 401.)),

- having regard to the Council's conclusions to the Fourth Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity ((Minutes of 23.3.1998 from the 2076th Council meeting.)),

- having regard to the UN's Agenda 21,

- having regard to the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy,

- having regard to the amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision on the revision of the Community environment action programme: Towards Sustainable Development ((OJ C 28, 29.1.1997, p. 18.)),

- having regard to Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds ('the Birds Directive') ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.)),

- having regard to Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora ('the Habitats Directive') ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.)),

- having regard to Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment ('the EIA Directive') ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.)),

- having regard to the proposal for a Council Directive on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment ('the SEA Directive) ((OJ C 129, 25.4.1997, p. 14.)),

- having regard to the Commission's communication to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community strategy to combat acidification (COM(97)0088),

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 722/97 on environmental measures in developing countries in the context of sustainable development ((OJ L 108, 25.4.1997, p. 1.)),

- having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection and the opinions of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Fisheries, the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy (A4-0347/98),

A. whereas Article 3c of the EC Treaty introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty states that 'environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Community policies and activities referred to in Article 3, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development',

B. whereas the Community's nature conservation legislation is not yet fully operational; whereas, moreover, many Member States have failed to implement that legislation,

C. whereas the Convention on Biological Diversity has prompted all the EU Member States to draw up national action programmes; noting that the Member States have not yet all compiled their action programmes and that the programmes produced vary in quality and scope,

D. whereas biological diversity is not only of biological and economic benefit but also an irreplaceable part of our cultural heritage and history, and is a legitimate resource for future generations,

E. whereas fish stocks have been reduced, sometimes to alarming levels, both within European waters and around the world, as documented by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations,

F. whereas the introduction of genetically modified organisms may have far-reaching implications for existing indigenous organisms,

G. whereas approximately 1% only of the EU's agricultural aid is spent on measures to preserve and promote biological diversity and some 4% is spent on other environmental measures,

H. whereas it is estimated that 16% of species of mammal in the world and 42% of those in Europe are currently under threat ((Source: IUCN - The World Conservation Union.)),

I. whereas the ever quickening rate at which biological diversity is decreasing shows no sign of easing up; whereas, moreover, the main reasons for this development are highly intensive use of land for agricultural and forestry purposes and the break-up of natural habitats through infrastructure and urbanisation, and their pollution,

J. whereas the EU should be fully compensating damage caused by the CAP, the TENs or regional policy in the form of extra nature conservancy areas or other measures, which should be financed from the Community budget,

K. whereas, in contrast to a number of other environmental problems, it is impossible to make up for losses of diversity of species, ecosystems and natural gene banks,

L. whereas the extinction of species and the loss of habitats are two of the main risks to environmental stability and human well-being,

M. whereas the Commission's communication is of a general nature and whereas there is a need for practical proposals in the next phase of Community policy on biological diversity,

N. whereas the bulk of genetic resources are situated in the less developed parts of the world, particularly the tropical forests and low-lying coastal areas such as mangrove swamps, and whereas traditional life-styles and know-how have a special contribution to make to preserving worldwide biodiversity,

O. whereas processes and activities such as deforestation, the introduction of non-sustainable farming methods, the unfair distribution of the advantages arising from the use of genetic resources, poverty and non-sustainable development projects financed by the EU, are having an adverse effect on biodiversity in the less developed countries,

1. Welcomes the Commission's communication on a European Community biodiversity strategy which constitutes a first step towards incorporating biodiversity in other Community policies and marks the beginning of moves to stem the loss of natural resources;

2. Agrees with the Commission's basic view that the proposed strategy should integrate biodiversity conservation into the Community's other areas of policy, while forming a framework for Community policies aimed at fulfilling the EU's and its Member States' commitments under the Convention on biological diversity; requests the Commission also to encourage integration between the various policy areas;

3. Considers that the objectives formulated in the communication are valid but too general and that the two key issues of unlimited growth of transport and tourism and the implementation of a sustainable sound approach are missed;

4. Emphasises that biodiversity plays an important role in ecosystems, since it guarantees the quality of water and air, climate stability and soil quality and ensures the presence of resources that are indispensable for the survival of man on Earth;

5. Stresses the particular need for coordinated initiatives, measures and programmes to promote research into biodiversity at Community, national and international level;

6. Notes that there is periodically a need for a detailed and comparable inventory of species ('the state of nature¨), ecosystems and natural gene banks to enable the situation of those that are threatened to be assessed, evaluated and improved; calls therefore on the Commission to present as soon as possible an overview of the measures which the Community has initiated and a proposal for a periodical inventory of biological diversity, for example through the European Environment Agency and Eurostat;

7. Urges the Commission¨s appropriate departments to comply with the forthcoming series of indicators that will need to be laid down, particularly by the European Environment Agency and Eurostat; considers that such indicators are important for the development and assessment of every part of the communication relating to sectoral policies; draws attention to the importance of transparency in the decision-making process on the indicators;

8. Calls on the Commission to include in the policy sectors it proposes the objective 'Development of basic knowledge of biodiversity and the functioning of ecosystems' in order to promote research into the development of biodiversity indicators, basic monitoring and assessment methods to ascertain the state of individual species and ecosystems, research into and the systematic recording of all forms of life, a systematic study of the genetic wealth of various forms of life and research into the reciprocal effects of different species;

9. Maintains that protected areas offer insufficient protection for biological diversity and stresses that the Community's other areas of policy must integrate biodiversity conservation issues; considers that the link between the Community's nature conservation and agricultural policies is particularly inadequate;

10. Calls on the Commission to take initiatives to ensure that the Habitats and Birds Directives are implemented fully in the Member States by means of an appropriate regulatory framework aimed at ensuring effective implementation and monitoring of those directives;

11. Calls on the Commission to adopt the appropriate measures to require Member States fully to comply with Community law on the environment and nature conservancy;

12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify monitoring and environmental control in sensitive areas;

13. Stresses the importance of preserving the EU's remaining virgin forests and other natural woodland;

14. Calls on the Commission to stipulate that the action plans proposed in the communication should be drawn up and ready within two years after the Commission has received notification and to specify timetables for the individual measures proposed in those plans; also calls on the Commission to consolidate the action plans into an overall plan which must be adopted by the European Parliament and Council; finally calls on the Commission to draw up each individual action plan and their subsequent evaluations in close cooperation with national experts and representatives of individual organisations;

15. Calls urgently for a transparent control mechanism to be established, for a unit at the Commission to be designated responsible and for periodic reports to be drawn up on the results achieved in terms of compliance with the objectives of the communication in all sectors;

16. Considers the Commission's reference to strategies for acidification and climate change as inadequate reasons for not drawing up biodiversity action plans for the transport and energy sectors and calls, therefore, on the Commission also to submit action plans for those sectors; notes, furthermore, that the Commission devotes no attention at all to the impact of chemical and industrial processes on biological diversity;

17. Notes that the future accessions to the EU will entail fundamental change in the agricultural sector in the applicant countries and that one of the main objectives of this change must be the preservation of biological diversity in order to avoid the risk of wide-ranging and permanent impoverishment of biodiversity;

18. Urges the Commission therefore to include the applicant countries¨ national action plans in the EU¨s ongoing evaluation of biological diversity; also urges the Commission to make aid to those countries dependent on biological diversity criteria and not to grant derogations from the Community¨s nature conservation legislation;

19. Stresses the importance of the EU ceasing to provide aid via the CAP, the TENs or the Structural Funds for projects with a directly negative impact on biological diversity and also calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to adapt the EU budget to take account of the environment;

20. Notes that the common agricultural policy often has a directly negative impact on the Community¨s biological diversity and calls, therefore, on the Commission, in the current revision, to press for a switch to sustainable agriculture which respects biological diversity and for a greater part of agricultural aid to be earmarked for environmental measures and organic farming;

21. Agrees in principle with the analysis of the status quo contained in the Commission proposal for a European Community biodiversity strategy; considers it necessary, however, in addition to the associated targets, to put forward more specific proposals on the integration of protection and utilisation measures in the framework of the common agricultural and the forestry policies and draws attention in this connection to the proposals of the European Working Group on Research and Biodiversity (EWGRB) set up by DG XII;

22. Points out that the sustainable rural development policy put forward in Agenda 2000 and the integration of environment and agriculture policy are particularly suited to the conservation and use of the diversity of genetic resources;

23. Calls, in this connection, for Regulations (EC) No 1467/94, (EEC) No 2078/92, (EEC) No 2080/92 and (EEC) No 2029/91 (environmental measures in agriculture) and Regulation (EEC) No 2092/93 (rural development) to be better equipped in terms of funding and staffing, and for the consequences of the common agricultural policy and its many implementing regulations for the utilisation and preservation of genetic resources in agriculture and forestry to be investigated;

24. Considers it counterproductive in this context for the Commission, in the framework of the reform of the agricultural policy, to withdraw increasingly from Community initiatives and European coordination activities and to abandon or leave to the Member States targeted project support for the integration of conservation measures and agricultural use of genetic diversity without coordinating or harmonising the initiatives taken;

25. Is disappointed that the Commission has not used the accompanying measures of the programme of work for Regulation (EC) No 1467/94, with which the exchange of experiences and the necessary cooperation between collections (state and private gene banks), research and users (farmers, horticulturists, breeders) was to be supported;

26. Stresses the need to improve the quality of the permanent inventory of resources which have already been collected in the framework of Regulation (EC) No 1467/94, in particular by facilitating a better listing and description of in situ collections of plants, animals and trees and by improving the description of the special characteristics with regard to usefulness (cultivation or rearing conditions, importance for landscape conservation, special characteristics with regard to processing, storage, taste, colour, etc.);

27. Considers that there is an urgent need, in relation to the new applicant countries and their financial and staffing problems in the conservation of genetic resources, to extend the programme to these states during the pre-accession phase;

28. Calls on the Commission to alter the requirements for support for projects on a shared cost basis and concerted actions so that not only individual species but also associated groups of species and their specific environment are taken into account and that in particular integrated in situ conservation and utilisation measures can be supported;

29. Calls on the Commission to coordinate the projects carried out in the framework of Regulation (EC) No 1467/94 and their results with the accompanying measures to promote environmentally friendly production and afforestation (Regulations (EEC) Nos 2078/92 and 2080/92), to support not only aid for endangered species of animals but also the conservation of regionally adapted useful plants and trees and, in the framework of the accompanying measures to Regulation (EC) No 1467/94, to ensure that practical constructive cooperation develops between researchers, gene banks, in situ conservationists, farmers, horticulturists and breeders;

30. Stresses, from the policy viewpoint of 'good stewardship', the importance of maintaining and developing agricultural methods which preserve and strengthen biological diversity, such as extensive pasturage, and also calls on the Commission to introduce an exemption from the certification requirement under Directives 70/457/EEC and 70/458/EEC for traditional culinary herbs and ornamental plants which are of minor commercial value;

31. Calls on the Commission to set up an independent forum for the conservation of genetic diversity in agricultural and forestry production and fisheries in which all parties active in the utilisation and conservation of genetic diversity can exchange their experiences, coordinate their work and advise the competent Commission departments in the development of the Community biodiversity strategy;

32. Proposes to the Commission that in the distribution of tasks it should improve its interaction with the European cooperative programmes on crop and forestry genetic resources (ECPGR and EUFORGEN) and also on animal genetic resources (global programme for the conservation of farm animal diversity and its implementation at European level) and concentrate on the conservation of genetic diversity through utilisation in practical agriculture and horticulture, in order to be better prepared for the necessary integration of economic, environmental and social aspects in the framework of the reform of the CAP;

33. Stresses the importance of the report of the international technical conference on genetic resources held in Leipzig (Germany) in June 1996 under the auspices of the FAO;

34. Notes the extremely negative impact which the EU fisheries policy has had on certain fish stocks, marine mammals and turtles and stresses the importance of adapting fishing methods and fishing gear in order to reduce habitat degradation caused by certain types of fishing and to avoid by-catches; also calls on the Commission to press for the incorporation into the Community¨s fisheries policy of the North Sea Conference ((Fifth International North Sea Conference, ministerial meeting on integration of fisheries and environmental issues, 13-14 March 1997, Bergen, Norway, conclusions.)) principles on the integration of fisheries and environmental considerations;

35. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the principles and commitments undertaken in the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing are fully integrated into the various aspects of the common fisheries policy;

36. Calls on the Commission to set up a working party of scientists with the task of elaborating and facilitating the implementation of a plan for research into the interaction between fisheries and marine ecosystems;

37. Emphasises that the Commission should work in a coordinated fashion on a biodiversity plan for fisheries in order to avoid sectoral interests and to ensure that environmental aspects are more fully integrated in the fisheries sector;

38. Calls on the Commission to use the precautionary approach, as it has been defined in the UN Agreement on Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and Straddling Fish Stocks, in its management of fish stocks and to urge that all regional fisheries management bodies to which the Community belongs also adopt the same principle;

39. Encourages the Commission to form a consistent plan with respect to commitments under international agreements, specifically those relating to fisheries, to which they are signatory in order to strengthen conservation;

40. Calls on the Commission to stipulate how the objectives defined in the biodiversity strategy will be implemented to achieve sustainable management of fish stocks, and possibly to re-write objectives in such a way as to encourage a broader ecosystem approach;

41. Calls on the Commission to include in the fisheries policy sector the development of methods for renewing the natural wealth of the seas, particularly as regards species which are subject to intensive fishing, and support for regions which lend themselves to traditional forms of fishing;

42. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the effects of the EU¨s distant water fishing fleets, which operate in both international waters and under the aegis of international fisheries agreements, on biological diversity in the world¨s seas and, where necessary, to reduce the activities of those fleets; further demands that these fleets be subject to similar controls and restrictions as EU vessels fishing in European waters;

43. Supports the Commission¨s decision to accentuate training and increased public awareness as a key area; urges the Commission, however, to invest resources in strengthening already existing regional environmental campaigning among the public in the context of Agenda 21, for example, instead of investing money as the Commission proposes in an EU campaign;

44. Stresses the principle enshrined in the Convention concerning the sovereign rights of all countries to their own genetic resources and emphasises that that right must take precedence over other principles in the international agreements concluded by the Community, e.g. in the patent sector; stresses that the sovereign rights of other countries must also be recognised in all EU legislation;

45. Takes the view that legislation concerning the introduction and implantation of extraneous species and genetically modified organisms must be based on the precautionary principle, and stresses that in the forthcoming negotiations for adoption of the Biosafety Protocol the starting-point must be a high level of protection of human health and biodiversity;

46. Considers indispensable the establishment of a legislative framework to legally safeguard the use and balanced sharing-out of the benefits of biodiversity and to give practical effect to the provisions of Article 8j of the Convention on Biological Diversity;

47. Calls on the Commission to commit itself to a binding Biosafety Protocol to the Convention which safeguards human and animal health, the environment and biological diversity and which protects the socio-economic welfare of societies;

48. Underlines the importance of the activities already under way in the development cooperation sector, such as research into genetic resources, technology transfer, improving capacity, the development of a special policy for indigenous peoples and the particular care of tropical forests; calls on the Commission, in particular, to promote an honest and fair distribution of the advantages arising from the use of genetic material, not only in its own policy but also at the negotiations in international fora set up for the purpose, such as the conference of parties to the Treaty on Biological Diversity, in which the concept of the 'economic value of a natural resource¨ may form one of the starting-points;

49. Calls on the Commission to assist the developing countries in producing an inventory of and conducting research into their natural resources (species, ecosystems and habitats) and setting up databases and gene banks in those countries;

50. Notes the importance of incorporating the costs arising from the use of biodiversity resources in all stages of the productive process;

51. Calls on the Commission to add the following rules for the export of genetically modified organisms (GMOs):

for the export of GMOs and/or products containing GMOs to non-Member States, the exporter or importer must be in possession of

- approval of the import from the country of destination

- an export permit from the authority in the competent Member State.

Import authorisation from the country of destination must be submitted for the authority in the competent Member State to grant approval;

52. Calls on the Commission to set up a clear and all-inclusive system for labelling products which are derived from or contain genetically modified organisms;

53. Calls on the Commission to envisage the adoption of positive economic incentives aimed at conserving biodiversity and legislative measures (fines or taxes) to discourage practices or uses which harm biodiversity;

54. Calls on the Commission to stipulate that detailed environmental impact reports be drawn up for projects forming part of the Community¨s regional policy and that regional aid may be withdrawn if a project does not meet the required environmental criteria or has a directly harmful impact on biological diversity; also urges the Commission expressly to take account of the strategy for biological diversity in the forthcoming regulation concerning the EU Structural Funds for the period 2000-2006;

55. Calls on the European Investment Bank to improve its environment work and carry out detailed, publicly accessible environmental impact assessments on projects in the applicant countries before those projects are approved;

56. Welcomes the awareness that the loss of biodiversity is largely due to the 'increased fragmentation of remaining natural habitats by infrastructures and urbanisation and the exposure to mass tourism...';

57. Calls for the enforcement of the Strategic Environmental Assessment procedure within decision-making processes of the European Investment Bank concerning TENs projects;

58. Stresses the need to carry out strategic environmental impact assessments of infrastructure projects; also stresses that the Community should not fund TENs which destroy valuable environments;

59. Asks the Commission and Member States to ensure that the construction of new transport infrastructure within protected areas (see Birds Directive, Habitats Directive and Natura 2000 Network) will not lead to a reduction of biodiversity, and that, in any case, projects not respecting this rule do not receive financial support from the Community;

60. Considers that transport infrastructures have a significant impact on biodiversity and calls for the application of Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environment Assessment on all projects involving transport infrastructures;

61. Asks the Commission to include in the legislation on which the TENs and regional policy are based provisions that will make it possible to take special measures in the case of large infrastructure projects to minimise or compensate for the fragmentation of natural environments (for instance by concentrating infrastructure and by constructing viaducts or tunnels for wildlife);

62. Considers that the Community guidelines for the TENs, adopted by Parliament and the Council in 1996, have not proved adequate for the adoption of strategic decisions, and that major transport infrastructure projects have often led to serious loss and/or damage of important European habitats; calls accordingly for the TEN guidelines to be revised, as laid down, by July 1999;

63. Notes the need to shift transport flows to modes which have less impact on biodiversity, for instance from road to rail as requested by the international Alps Convention;

64. Notes that the proposed internalisation of the external costs by the Commission would be essential for the implementation of sustainable transport policies as requested by the Convention on Biological Diversity;

65. Calls on the Commission, within the framework of energy policy, to promote the use of environmentally-friendly renewable sources of energy on the basis of the objectives adopted at the Kyoto Conference on climate change;

66. Asks the Commission to apply best practice among public and private tourism installations and services in order to promote sustainable tourism;

67. Asks the Commission to develop not only international guidelines for sustainable tourism, but also to orientate any existing or future EU tourism programmes towards sustainable tourism;

68. Suggests that the Commission draws up an ecolabel for sustainable tourism;

69. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.