Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an infrastructure for spatial information in the Community (INSPIRE)
Date: 2006-02-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: access to information, data collection, environmental policy, exchange of information, information network, remote sensing

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 10.2.2006 
COM(2006)51 final 

2004/0175(COD) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty 

concerning 

the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of 
the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an infrastructure for 
spatial information in the Community (INSPIRE) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
2004/0175(COD) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty 

concerning 

the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of 
the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an infrastructure for 
spatial information in the Community (INSPIRE) 

1. 

BACKGROUND 

Date of transmission of the proposal to the EP and the Council 
(document COM(2004) 516 final – 2004/0175 (COD)): 

23 July 2004 

Date of the opinion of the European Parliament, first reading: 

7 June 2005 

Date of the opinion of the European Economic and Social 
Committee: 

9 February 2005 

Date of adoption of the common position: 

23 January 2006 

2. 

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL 

The overall aim of the proposal is to improve the way in which spatial data held by 
public authorities supports environmental policy, by improving the harmonisation of 
spatial data and the interoperability of spatial services and ensuring greater sharing of 
the  data  between  public  authorities  and  on-line  access  by  the  public.  The  type  of 
spatial data covered is specified in three annexes to the proposal. 

The proposed directive would require Member States to take the following measures:  

•  establish  a  network  of  services  that  allows  to  search  for,  view  and  access  the 

spatial data from a one-stop Internet portal  

•  make their spatial data sets and services interoperable (i.e. technically compatible) 

in accordance with implementing rules adopted by committee procedure 

•  produce catalogues of the data held by their public authorities, contain “metadata” 

providing certain types of information regarding the data 

•  make the spatial data accessible to the public 

•  remove obstacles for the sharing of spatial data between public authorities 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
3. 

COMMENTS ON THE COMMON POSITION 

3.1 

General comments 

The Commission can accept in full, in part or in principle 46 of the 49 amendments 
proposed by the European Parliament at its first reading. Many of these amendments 
have now been incorporated, either verbatim or in substance in the common position. 

The  Commission  cannot  accept  the  common  position  with  regard  to  a  number  of 
issues. The most important of these issues include the following: 

The  Commission  does  not  agree  that  intellectual  property  rights  held  by  public 
authorities should be among the list of grounds for limiting public access to spatial 
data. 

The Commission also does not agree that the possibility of limiting access should be 
extended  to  cover  discovery  services  referred  to  in  Article  18(1)(a)  of  the 
Commission proposal, since this would mean that the public would not even be able 
to learn of the existence of the data. 

The  Commission maintains that the view  services referred to in Article 18(1)(b) of 
the Commission proposal should be made available free of charge, and cannot accept 
the  Council  position  allowing  public  authorities  to  charge  and  license  for  these 
services under certain conditions; 

The common position makes the obligation to avoid obstacles to data sharing, as well 
as  the  rules  for  ensuring  harmonised  conditions  for  Community  institutions  and 
bodies, subordinate to the right of public data providers to charge and license other 
authorities  for  their  data.  It  is  also  vague  about  the  obstacles  to  be  avoided.  It  will 
therefore be ineffective in achieving one of the key aims of the proposal, and could 
even have the effect of increasing obstacles to the sharing of data. 

Finally, while the Commission agrees that the provisions relating to data sharing do 
not  affect  the  existence  or  ownership  of  public  authorities’  intellectual  property 
rights, it does not see the need for this to be stated in the text of the directive. If such 
a provision is to be included, it should be made equally clear that these rights must be 
exercised in accordance with the other provisions. 

3.2 

Detailed comments 

3.2.1 

Parliamentary  amendments  acceptable  to  the  Commission  in  full,  in  part  or  in 
principle and incorporated in the common position 

Amendments 1 and 5, regarding the recitals, have been incorporated in full, in part or 
in principle.  

Amendment 6 concerning the aim of the directive has been incorporated in part, by 
referring to spatial management in a recital. 

Amendments 8-12 have the effect of restructuring parts of the text in order to make it 
clearer.  This  restructuring  has  also  been  taken  up  in  the  common  position.  In 
addition,  amendment  9  makes  some  technical  changes  to  the  definitions,  most  of 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
which have been incorporated in the common position. Amendment 10 also includes 
a  small,  and  acceptable,  restriction  of  the  comitology  provisions  in  relation  to 
updating the annexes. 

Amendment  13  and  14  relate  to  the  metadata  that  has  to  be  created  in  relation  to 
spatial data sets and services covered by the directive. These have both been taken up 
in principle, by requiring Member States to provide information on fees related to the 
rights  of  use  of  spatial  data  sets  and  services  and  ensuring  that  the  quality  of  the 
metadata is fit for purpose. 

Amendments 15 and 21 slightly change the wording in relation to the timescale for 
complying  with 
the 
corresponding articles. 

implementing  rules,  and  have  been 

incorporated 

in 

Amendments 16-20, 22 and 23 clarify certain provisions relating to the implementing 
rules  designed  to  improve  interoperability  between  spatial  data  sets  and  services. 
These have all been taken up in principle in the common position Articles 7 to 10, 
which also improves the structure of this part of the text. 

Amendment 24 seeks to clarify the nature of the services to be provided by Member 
States allowing data providers to link their data to the INSPIRE infrastructure. This 
concern is also reflected in the common position, Art 12. 

Amendment  25  removes  an  unintended  ambiguity  in  the  original  proposal  and  has 
been incorporated into the common position in the final paragraph of Art 11. 

Amendment  27  clarifies  the  services  for  which  technical  specifications  are  to  be 
drawn  up  by  comitology.  The  common  position  incorporates  this  clarification  in 
Art 16, following its restructured text. 

Amendment  29  clarifies  that  the  arrangements  for  sharing  data  with  international 
bodies should be the same ones as those applying to sharing between authorities at 
national and Community level. This has been taken up in Art 17(5) of the common 
position, with the caveat that this sharing should be on an open and reciprocal basis. 

Amendment  31  clarifies  the  intending  meaning  of  the  additional  access  to  data  for 
Community institutions and bodies in the original proposal. Art 17(8) of the common 
position  incorporates  this  clarification,  although  other  changes  to  this  paragraph 
made by the Council are not acceptable to the Commission. 

Amendment  35  clarifies 
the 
implementation  of  the  directive  alongside  European  standards.  This  has  been  taken 
up  in  Art  20  of  the  common  position,  with  the  additional  clarification  that  the 
implementing rules referred to in the directive should take them into account. 

international  standards  should  support 

that 

Amendment 36 requires Member States to make the results of their monitoring of the 
implementation of the directive available on a permanent basis to the public as well 
as to the Commission. This has been taken up in Art 21(1). 

Amendment  38  specifies  that  the  Commission’s  report  on  the  application  of  the 
directive should be based on the reports from the Member States. This has been taken 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
up in Art 23, with the addition of the words “inter alia”, recognising that there may 
be other sources as well. 

Amendments  39,  42,  43,  46  and  48  provide  useful  clarifications  or  minor 
modifications  to  various  themes  in  the  annexes  and  are  incorporated  in  common 
position, sometimes with further clarification. Amendment 40 and 41 move the data 
theme “geology” from Annex III to Annex II.  

Amendment  44  extends  the  scope  of  the  directive  to  include  utilities,  government 
services  and  environmental  monitoring  facilities.  This  extension  will  increase  the 
relevance  of  the  directive  for  environmental-policy  making  and  therefore  serves  its 
overall  aim.  Amendment  49  includes  an  extra  theme  on  renewable  energy  sources. 
The  extra  themes  are  also  incorporated  in  the  common  position,  with  some 
modification. 

3.2.2 

Parliamentary amendments not acceptable to the Commission and not incorporated 
in the common position 

Amendment 2 regarding the recitals was not considered relevant for the proposal and 
has therefore not been accepted.  

Amendment 7 extending the infrastructure to include data held at Community level is 
not  acceptable  to  the  Commission  and  has  not  been  incorporated  into  the  common 
position, since such a provision would entail obligations on Community institutions 
and  bodies,  which  a  Directive  cannot  do.  The  statement  given  at  the  end  of  this 
Communication nevertheless expresses the Commission’s willingness to ensure that 
data held by Community institutions and bodies are in practice incorporated into the 
INSPIRE infrastructure. 

3.2.3 

Parliamentary  amendments  accepted  by  the  Council  but  not  acceptable  to  the 
Commission  

Amendment  30  truncates  the  text  of  a  provision  in  the  Commission  proposal  that 
aims to prevent distortion of competition in cases where public authorities also carry 
out commercial activities unrelated to the performance of their public tasks. Since the 
provision  as  amended  simply  restates  the  Treaty  obligation  to  prevent  distortion  of 
competition  without  specifying  the  context  or  relevance,  the  Council  has  therefore 
decided  to  delete  the  provision  altogether.  While  this  is  an  improvement  on  the 
Parliament’s amendment, the Commission would prefer to see the original provision 
reinstated in full. 

3.2.4 

Parliamentary amendments acceptable to the Commission but not integrated in the 
common position  

Amendment 3 seeks to clarify the provisions relating to data sharing between public 
authorities  by  including  a  recital  concerning  financial  compensation  of  public  data 
providers. The Commission can accept this amendment since it is consistent with the 
Commission  proposal.  The  Council,  on  the  other  hand,  has  made  more  substantial 
changes  to  the  data  sharing  provisions  and  have  consequently  not  incorporated  this 
amendment. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
Amendments 4, 33 and 34 provide that structures set up to co-ordinate the INSPIRE 
infrastructure should extend to the various levels of government and take account of 
the  distribution  of  powers  and  responsibilities  within  the  Member  States.  This  is 
acceptable  to  the  Commission,  with  some  modification,  but  has  not  been 
incorporated in the Council position. 

Amendment 26 would allow public data providers to make view services available in 
a  form  preventing  their  re-use  for  commercial  purposes,  and  to  include  a  click-
licence  to  restrict  the  use  that  can  be  made  of  the  data.  This  would  provide  an 
effective means to protect public data providers from any abusive use of this service. 
The  Council  has  not  incorporated  this  amendment,  preferring  to  include  a  more 
general provision allowing data providers to apply charges as well as license to these 
services. 

Amendment  28  requires  Member  States  to  ensure  that  implementation  of  the 
provisions  relating  to  the  sharing  of  data  between  public  authorities  does  not 
adversely affect the availability of spatial data sets and services. This amendment has 
not  been  taken  up  by  the  Council,  which  has  instead  opted  for  a  considerable 
weakening of the data sharing provisions. 

Amendment  32  ensures  that  the  establishment  of  common  licences  foreseen  in  the 
Commission  proposal  will  not  unnecessarily  restrict  possibilities  for  re-use  of  data 
and  use  of  services  and  will  not  be  used  to  restrain  competition.  This  is  entirely 
consistent  with  the  Commission’s  intention,  but  has  not  been  taken  up  by  the 
Council, which has instead opted to delete the corresponding provision altogether. 

Amendment  37  requires  Member  States  to  provide  information  on  the  agreements 
between  public  authorities  on  harmonising  and  sharing  information.  There  is  no 
specific  provision  in  the  proposal  for  agreements  on  harmonisation  of  information, 
but this amendment could be accepted in principle if it refers to the measures taken 
by Member States to improve interoperability between spatial data sets and services. 
The amendment has not been taken up by the Council. 

Amendment  45  provides  a  justifiable  extension  to  the  scope  of  the  data  theme  on 
population distribution and demography. Amendment 47 adds a new data theme on 
“areas under anthropogenic stress”, which could be accepted provided the concept is 
further clarified. Neither of these amendments are reflected in the common position 

3.2.5 

Additional changes made by the Council to the Proposal 

The Council has made a number of additional changes to the proposal. Many of these 
are  of  a  technical  nature  and  go  in  a  similar  direction  to  the  Parliament’s 
amendments.  However,  the  common  position  makes  a  number  of  more  substantial 
modifications  to  the  Commission  proposal,  some  of  which  seriously  undermine  the 
agreed aim of the directive. 

The  most  important  of  these  changes  relate  to  public  access  and  sharing  of  data 
between public authorities. 

Whereas  the  Commission  proposal  provides  that  network  services  allowing  the 
public to discover and view data held by public authorities should be made available 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
free  of  charge,  the  common  position  allows  public  data  providers  to  apply  charges 
and  licensing  restrictions  when  they  “are  an  essential  precondition  to  maintain  the 
spatial  data  sets  and  services  or  to  fulfil  requirements  of  already  existing 
international  spatial  data  infrastructure  in  a  sustainable  way”  (Art  14),  without 
defining  in  what  circumstances  this  could  be  the  case.  Furthermore,  the  common 
position  includes  intellectual  property  rights  among  the  list  of  grounds  for  limiting 
public  access  provided  in  Art  13,  and  allows  these  grounds  to  apply  to  discovery 
services alongside the other network services. 

In  relation  to  sharing  of  data  between  public  authorities,  Art  17  reflects  a 
significantly  lower  level  of  ambition  than  Art  23  of  the  Commission  proposal,  and 
could even have the effect of increasing rather than reducing obstacles to the sharing 
of data. The most important changes are in:  

•  paragraph 3, which makes the preclusion of restrictions subordinate to the right of 
data providers to enter into licensing arrangements and require payment from user 
authorities,  

•  paragraph  8,  which  makes  the  provisions  relating  to  harmonised  access  for 

Community institutions and bodies subject to the same condition, and 

•  paragraph  9,  which  asserts  that  the  Article  does  not  affect  the  existence  or 
ownership  of  public  sector  authorities'  intellectual  property  rights,  without 
clarifying that these rights should nevertheless be exercised in accordance with the 
other provisions. 

The  Commission  cannot  support  these  changes  since  they  will  unduly  limit  public 
access,  make  implementation  of  the  directive  more  difficult  to  achieve,  and  reduce 
the  availability  of  data  and  consequently  the  added  value  of  the  infrastructure. 
Art 17(3) presents a particular concern since it is likely to encourage data providers 
to up legal and financial obstacles to the sharing of data with public authorities, thus 
having the opposite effect to the one intended. 

Another serious concern relates to the procedure for adopting implementing rules on 
interoperability provided in Art 7(2) and (3) of the common position. This requires 
the  Commission  to  undertake  an  analysis  of  the  feasibility  and  expected  costs  and 
benefits, specifies that the rules cannot result in excessive costs to a Member State, 
and requires Member States to comply with the rules only “to the extent feasible”. 

While the Commission fully recognises the need to take feasibility and cost-benefit 
considerations  into  account  when  drawing  up  the  rules,  their  technical  and 
incremental  nature  will  not  in  general  justify  a  full  and  explicit  analysis,  and  a 
requirement to provide such an analysis will lead to considerable delay and wasted 
effort. Furthermore, the text as proposed by the Council could be interpreted to mean 
an  implementing  rule  could  not  be  proposed  for  adoption  if  excessive  costs  would 
result for just one out of the 25 Member States. The committee procedure foreseen in 
the  Commission  proposal  allows  Member  States  to  scrutinise  the  draft  rules  and 
reject them if they are unfeasible, not cost-effective or otherwise inappropriate. Once 
they are adopted, it is essential that they are applied without exception, otherwise the 
objective of ensuring interoperability will not be achieved. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
Finally,  the  Commission  also  has  the  following  comments  concerning  other 
additional changes made by the Council. 

•  Some of the timescales envisaged in the Commission proposal for implementation 
by Member States, both of the implementing rules and of the directive as a whole, 
have  been  lengthened.  The  Commission  considers  that  the  timescales  in  the 
original proposal should be maintained. 

•  It  must  be  ensured  that  the  references  to  international  standards  (Art  7(1))  and 
standards  adopted  by  European  standardisation  bodies  (Art  20)  do  not  create  an 
obligation to adopt such standards in the context of the INSPIRE directive, since 
in some cases this would lead to high costs that would not be justified from a cost-
benefit point of view.  

•  Metadata  created  for  spatial  data  sets  and  services  should  include  not  only 
information on whether the data have been validated (Art 5(2)(c)) but also other 
types of information concerning the validity of the data including, for example, a 
description of the validation method. 

•  In Annex III point 7, the following title would be more in line with the way the 
relevant  services  are  described  in  the  General  Agreement  on  Trade  in  Services 
(GATS):  "Government,  health,  education,  energy,  environmental  services  and 
environmental monitoring facilities". 

4. 

CONCLUSION 

The  common  position  potentially  represents  a  significant  milestone  towards  the 
adoption  of  a  directive  that  will  help  to  improve  the  knowledge  base  for 
environmental and other policies by improving the availability and interoperability of 
spatial data. Many of its provisions provide a good basis on which to make progress. 

However, certain aspects of the common position could have the effect of reducing 
rather than increasing the availability of spatial data, by consolidating the obstacles 
to  data  sharing  between  authorities  and  unduly  limiting  public  access.  Other 
provisions will make the directive difficult to implement and reduce its effectiveness 
in making data systems interoperable. 

For this reason, the Commission cannot accept the common position. 

5. 

STATEMENTS BY THE COMMISSION 

General statement. 

The Commission notes that the common position has been adopted unanimously by 
the Council. The Commission nevertheless cannot support the common position as it 
falls well short of the overall level of ambition that is essential for this Proposal.  

The text of the common position leaves too much scope for data providers to refuse 
to give public access to their data and share it with other authorities. Other concerns 
are  the  over-burdensome  procedures  for  adopting  rules  under  comitology  and 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
insufficient  guarantee  that  these  rules  will  be  fully  implemented  in  the  Member 
States  

Statement  concerning  the  application  of  INSPIRE  to  data  held  by  Community 
Institutions and bodies 

The  Commission  fully  agrees  that  the  INSPIRE  infrastructure  should  cover  spatial 
data sets and services at Community level, in order to ensure coherence between the 
infrastructure for spatial information established in the Member States and relevant 
information at Community level. The Commission will make every effort to ensure 
this and will, if appropriate, come forward with a legislative proposal regulating the 
establishment  of  the  components  of  INSPIRE  within  the  relevant  Community 
Institutions and bodies. 

EN 

9 

   EN