Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 establishing a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE) () (96/C 100/23)

The Committee of the Regions decided on 19 July 1995, in accordance with Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an Opinion on the above-mentioned proposal.

Commission 5 for Land-use Planning, Environment and Energy was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject. The Rapporteur was Mrs du Granrut.

At its 9th Plenary Session, held on 20 and 21 September 1995 (meeting of 21 September), the Committee of the Regions adopted the following Opinion.

1. Introduction

1.1. Whereas Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that one of the Community's tasks shall be to promote 'sustainable and non-inflationary growth respecting the environment` and whereas Article 3k states that the Community's activities shall include 'a policy in the sphere of the environment`;

1.2. Whereas under the terms of Article 130r, EU policy on the environment shall aim, inter alia, to preserve, protect and improve the quality of the environment, and that in preparing its policy, the Community shall take account of, among other things, the diversity of situations in the various regions of the EU;

1.3. Whereas the same Article states that EU policy shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay. Environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of other Community policies;

1.4. Whereas Article 130s of the TEU stipulates that, in order to achieve these objectives, the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 189c and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, shall decide what action is to be taken by the Union;

1.5. Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 established a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE) which consolidates Community programmes and activities adopted by the Council since 1984, for the purpose of furthering the development and implementation of Community policy and legislation in the field of the environment;

1.6. Whereas the LIFE instrument was introduced in order to bring together the non-structural programmes specific to the environment designed to provide assistance for concrete measures and field projects, aiming for both rationalization and greater consistency with the development of environmental policy;

1.7. Whereas the principal objective of the LIFE Regulation was to provide financial support for demonstration, promotion and technical assistance projects, and whereas its limited budget can consequently be geared only to example-setting activities which can then be reproduced on a larger scale with the assistance of other financial instruments;

1.8. Whereas the LIFE Regulation also permits the financing of measures to maintain or restore natural habitats and priority protected species, involving the promotion of emergency aid including land purchase, programmes to conserve and re-establish priority species, the compilation of inventories and the collection of data;

1.9. Whereas the first stage of the LIFE instrument comes to a close on 31 December 1995, and whereas under that regulation the Commission undertook to send the European Parliament and the Council a progress report on the implementation of LIFE - and in particular on the use of appropriations [Article 12(4)] - and a proposal for any adjustments to be made with a view to continuing the action beyond the first phase (Article 14);

1.10. Whereas in producing the document entitled 'Progress report on implementation of the LIFE Regulation and evaluation of the action by the Community relating to the environment - ACE, MEDSPA, NORSPA and ACNAT` the Commission has fulfilled its obligations as regards information on the implementation of LIFE, since this document meets the requirement for adjustments to be made to the initial regulation, with a view to continuing the action beyond 31 December 1995:

2. General comments

2.1. The Committee welcomes the proposal to amend 'Council Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 establishing a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE)` since this study of its operations over its first three years and that of the implementation of measures which preceded it have highlighted both its potential and the problems which should be rectified.

The COR is pleased that these proposals are designed to improve the efficiency of LIFE by taking account of its specific characteristics and the principle of subsidiarity and by providing for better visibility of the areas of activity, more transparent procedures, simplified operating expenses and wider utilization of the results obtained.

2.2. Recognizing the importance of the regional and local dimension of EU action to upgrade the environment, the COR welcomes the opportunity to comment on this area of responsibility which is essential to the lives of citizens, and not least on the conclusions of the report on the implementation of LIFE and the recommendations for amendments to the regulation designed to increase its efficiency.

In this respect, it would draw attention to the positions set out in its Opinion on the communication from the Commission on 'Europe 2000+` and, in particular, the need to include the environment in general in economic spatial development planning in the Community and to take account of the impact of economic growth on the use of natural resources, and the role of transnational cooperation in managing major natural features in a sustainable development context.

2.3. The Committee would also point out that the regions are the space and engine of the citizens' human environments, and that EU action should not oppose original features or similarities in the area of the environment but should, rather, promote both the range of diversity and the consistency which are at the root of the creation and preservation of the natural heritage, which gives everyone a special opportunity to understand his regional, national and European roots.

The COR is aware of the impact of action to preserve, protect and improve the environmental wealth of the Union within the economy which, through its range and diversity, can help to further the particularly rich potential for job creation in this area.

2.4. The COR endorses the choice of the following main areas of action for the LIFE financial instrument:

- to ensure implementation of the 'Natura 2000` European network;

- in areas other than the protection of nature, to assist the implementation of Community environmental policy through the financing of preparatory, demonstration, technical assistance, support and promotion projects - in respect, inter alia, of local authorities - and to promote sustainable development in industrial activities;

- to help the countries bordering the Mediterranean and the Baltic, and to help the CEECs in accordance with the terms laid down in the additional Protocols to the association agreements concerning these countries' participation in Community programmes;

- to promote know-how and experience gained.

2.5. The Committee considers it necessary to reiterate that LIFE must not go against the principle of concentration, which is a matter for the Structural Funds policy, by providing finance in non-eligible areas for projects that come under Community structural measures. It should, rather, aim to assert its originality by confining itself to demonstration and innovative projects than can be reproduced in other countries.

2.6. The COR takes the view that as a financial instrument which complements other public and private financial instruments available to the Union and the Member States in the field of the environment, LIFE - whether by co-financing activities or through interest rebates - must basically target specific areas of action following simple, transparent procedures, particularly with respect to applicants, in order to ensure that EU action brings real added value to existing policies. Local projects involving more than one Member State, or allowing particular Community-scale problems to be dealt with such as water contamination, urban pollution and the movement of dangerous waste in Europe, must be considered the most urgent areas of action.

2.7. The Committee welcomes the Commission proposal to extend the implementation of LIFE in a second four-year phase running from 1 January 1996 until 31 December 1999, since it is aware that LIFE has provided for the financing of activities involved in perfecting techniques to dispose of waste, to develop models to integrate the environment in spatial planning, to furthering socio-economic activities, protecting habitats and perfecting new clean technologies.

The COR considers that the horizontal dimension of the environment makes LIFE an effective instrument in defining a European spatial planning policy in terms of nature protection and of the application of the policy guidelines of the 5th Community action programme on the environment, particularly in respect of rural development, tourism, transport, urban development and river management. For this reason, the COR welcomes the provision for financing accompanying measures which are required both for the analysis, evaluation or promotion of action carried out under LIFE and the dissemination of information in this area.

2.8. The COR welcomes the importance attached to cooperation and coordination activities with non-Member States in Central and Eastern Europe, and the countries bordering the Baltic and the Mediterranean, in the quest for common solutions to environmental problems which have a transnational element or involve a specific issue.

3. Specific comments

3.1. Concerning the objectives: There is reason to fear, as the Commission believes, that the requirements that are needed to implement Directives in the area of nature protection will exceed the financial resources made available under LIFE. The COR suggests that, initially, in order not to run counter to LIFE's original characteristics compared to the other existing procedures, the first priority should be to finance activities covered by this instrument.

In granting financial support through LIFE - and in view of the important role which the regional and local authorities play in promoting the protection of the environment - the Committee does, however, call for projects which support the 'Natura 2000` network or related projects initiated by local authorities, to be eligible for Structural Fund assistance or for support from LIFE.

The COR would also stress the need to finance activities to assist local authorities to incorporate environmental considerations in spatial planning and to support transfrontier projects such as the management and re-use of waste, sewage treatment, the rehabilitation of polluted sites, the management of coastal areas and the exchange of information on experience in the campaign against urban pollution or, more generally, risk prevention.

The COR would also stress the importance of local and regional authorities in delivering local Agenda 21 and calls for LIFE to give financial support to local authorities working towards sustainability and the fifth environment action programme.

3.2. Concerning the timetable and the financial package: The COR takes the view that while four years is an appropriate timescale for implementing LIFE and for obtaining useful results, the proposed figure of ECU 450 million falls short of the programme's ambitions as they have been presented; particular difficulties may arise with checking the implementation and relevance of the projects that receive financing, and with promoting accompanying measures.

3.3. Concerning the selection criteria: the Committee calls for the LIFE information brochure, which sets out both the criteria for admission and eligibility and the criteria for selecting projects, to be readily accessible to applicants. It also invites the Commission and the Member States to involve the Regions and local authorities in the dissemination of information to project partners at local level.

3.4. Concerning procedure: the COR considers that since the Regions and local authorities know their own local needs and problems, they should participate in the compilation and submission of project proposals. This would effectively reduce the number of projects submitted which are not eligible for financing under LIFE, and improve the overall quality of proposals and the transparency of the procedure.

The Committee endorses the Commission's proposal to spread the tasks and responsibilities more effectively in the management of the Habitats projects by simplifying the decision-making process and by increasing transparency in respect of the use of available appropriations. Since Community action can hasten or unblock the political decision-making process for the classification of habitats to be assigned an official legal status, it is important to improve the visibility of the procedure by giving the Habitats Committee alone the power to take final decisions in this area.

The Committee of the Regions stresses that it should be made possible to involve representatives of the regional and local authorities in drawing up national proposals concerning candidate projects for financial support, for submission to the European Commission. In this way, the expert knowledge of the local authorities will be exploited in selecting proposals.

3.5. Concerning the accompanying measures: the COR endorses the view that the implementation of the LIFE financial instrument requires accompanying measures to more effectively fulfil its purpose as a financial instrument complementing the other Community instruments. The Committee takes the view that the Regions and local authorities must be involved in the implementation of accompanying measures needed for the drafting, analysis or promotion to a wider public of information in this area, so that, when the results have been obtained, they can be disseminated widely with the aid of other financial instruments, so justifying EU action.

Concerning cost-benefit analysis: the COR wishes to express concern about terms such as 'cost-benefit rates`. This is not usually applicable to the assessment of innovative environmental work. Measures of success should centre around production of quality outputs as judged by expert external referees or commentators.

3.6. Concerning payments: the Committee calls for the Commission to take its decisions quickly and also for financial assistance to be made available as swiftly as possible.

4. Conclusions

4.1. The COR considers that the most significant feature of the LIFE instrument is its aim of testing out and validating the most successful and effective techniques, methods and know-how, and initiating action to protect natural sites that are considered a priority by stepping up environmental protection. As a matter of urgency, LIFE should address local and/or transnational, innovative and demonstration projects in specific areas such as nature protection or by tackling problems shared by several Member States involved in the process of spatial planning in the EU and the delivery of local Agenda 21, sustainability and the fifth environment action programme.

With this in view, LIFE can provide a basis for securing greater cohesion in the actions of Member States with regard to environmental problems and ensure a better balance between environmental policy and the other Community policies.

4.2. The COR considers that it is necessary to specify LIFE's operational areas in precise terms, clarify how projects are to be selected nationally and at Community level and give applicants comprehensive information on the financial assistance available from the EU in the field of the environment under the LIFE programme. It is for the Community authorities to provide the instrument with additional budgetary resources commensurate with its needs.

4.3. The Committee calls for the Regions and local authorities to be involved, in line with their environmental responsibilities and as the main financial partners presenting projects - and in line with the subsidiarity principle - in the selection procedure for projects submitted under the LIFE financial instrument and in the dissemination of information in this area.

Done at Brussels, 21 September 1995.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Jacques BLANC

() OJ No C 184, 18. 7. 1995, p. 12.