COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT The EU Environmental Implementation Review Country Report - LATVIA 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 The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common Challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver better results
Date: 2017-02-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, EU initiative, Latvia, application of EU law, environmental law, environmental protection, pollution control measures

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 3.2.2017  SWD(2017) 50 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT The EU Environmental Implementation Review Country Report - LATVIA   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 The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common Challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver better results   {COM(2017) 63 final} {SWD(2017) 33 - 49 final} {SWD(2017) 51 - 60 final}  
 
 
Latvia  2 

This  report  has  been  written  by  the  staff  of  the  Directorate-General  for  Environment,  European 
Commission. Any comments are welcome to the following e-mail address: ENV-EIR@ec.europa.eu  

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). 

Photographs: p.11 – ©gorsh13/iStock; p.16 – ©LIFE08 ENV/LV/000451; p.17 – © f9photos/iStock; 
p.22 – ©Giuseppe Di Paolo/iStock 

For reproduction or use of these photos, permission must be sought directly from the copyright 
holder. 

©European Union, 2017 

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Latvia  3 

Table of Content 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 4 

PART I: THEMATIC AREAS ............................................................................................................................... 5 

1. 

TURNING  THE  EU  INTO  A  CIRCULAR,  RESOURCE-EFFICIENT,  GREEN  AND  COMPETITIVE  LOW-
CARBON ECONOMY ............................................................................................................................... 5 

Developing a circular economy and improving resource efficiency ..................................................... 5 
Waste management .............................................................................................................................. 7 

2. 

PROTECTING, CONSERVING AND ENHANCING NATURAL CAPITAL ....................................................... 9 

Nature and Biodiversity ......................................................................................................................... 9 
Green Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................... 11 
Soil protection ..................................................................................................................................... 11 
Marine protection ............................................................................................................................... 12 

3. 

ENSURING CITIZENS' HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE .......................................................................... 14 

Air quality ............................................................................................................................................ 14 
 ................................................................................................................................................. 15 
Noise 
Water quality and management ......................................................................................................... 15 
Enhancing the sustainability of cities .................................................................................................. 17 
International agreements ................................................................................................................... 18 

PART II: ENABLING FRAMEWORK: IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS ..................................................................... 19 

4.  MARKET BASED INSTRUMENTS AND INVESTMENT ............................................................................ 19 

Green taxation and environmentally harmful subsidies ..................................................................... 19 
Green Public Procurement .................................................................................................................. 20 
Investments: the contribution of EU funds ......................................................................................... 20 

5. 

EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE AND KNOWLEDGE ...................................................................................... 22 

Effective governance within central, regional and local government ................................................. 22 
Public participation and access to justice ........................................................................................... 24 
Access to information, knowledge and evidence ................................................................................ 24 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
 
Executive summary 

Latvia  4 

About the Environmental Implementation Review 

launched 

reports  describing 

the 
the  Commission 
In  May  2016, 
Environmental  Implementation  Review  (EIR),  a  two-year 
cycle  of  analysis,  dialogue  and  collaboration  to  improve 
the  implementation  of  existing  EU  environmental  policy 
and  legislation1.  As  a  first  step,  the  Commission  drafted 
28 
the  main  challenges  and 
opportunities on environmental implementation for each 
Member  State.  These  reports  are  meant  to  stimulate  a 
positive debate both on shared environmental challenges 
for  the  EU,  as  well  as  on  the  most  effective  ways  to 
address the key implementation gaps. The reports rely on 
the detailed sectoral implementation reports collected or 
issued  by  the  Commission  under  specific  environmental 
legislation  as  well  as  the  2015  State  of  the  Environment 
Report  and  other  reports  by  the  European  Environment 
Agency.  These  reports  will  not  replace  the  specific 
instruments  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  EU  legal 
obligations.  

The  reports  will  broadly  follow  the  outline  of  the  7th 
Environmental Action Programme2 and refer to the 2030 
related 
for  Sustainable  development  and 
Agenda 
Sustainable Development  Goals  (SDGs)3  to  the  extent  to 
which  they  reflect  the  existing  obligations  and  policy 
objectives of EU environmental law4.  

The  main  challenges  have  been  selected  by  taking  into 
account factors such as the importance or the gravity of 
the  environmental  implementation  issue  in  the  light  of 
the  impact  on  the  quality  of  life  of  the  citizens,  the 
distance to target, and financial implications. 

The  reports  accompany  the  Communication  "The  EU 
Environmental  Implementation  Review  2016:  Common 
challenges  and  how  to  combine  efforts  to  deliver  better 
results", which identifies challenges that are common to 
several Member States, provides preliminary conclusions 
on  possible  root  causes  of  implementation  gaps  and 
proposes  joint  actions  to  deliver  better  results.  It  also 
groups in its Annex the actions proposed in each country 
report to improve implementation at national level. 

General profile 

Latvia  is  a  well  organised  country  that  benefits  from 
a good  level  of  environmental  protection  and,  generally 
high air and water quality. It has a relatively high variety 

nature 

conservation 

of  different  ecosystems  and  natural  areas  and  is  one  of 
the countries in Europe with the richest biodiversity and 
established 
traditions. 
Environmental implementation in Latvia is good with low 
numbers  of  complaints  and  infringements.  However, 
waste  management  and  particularly  recycling,  remains 
amongst the challenges for Latvia requiring strong efforts 
in  order  to  reach  the  2020  recycling  target  of  50%. 
There is also further room for improvement in addressing 
issues.  Latvia  could  benefit  from 
resource 
a more  structured  approach  and  political  support  to 
the circular  economy,  as  well  as  from  targeted  eco-
innovation policy. 

intensity 

Main Challenges 

The main challenges with regards to the implementation 
of EU environmental policy and law in Latvia are: 

 

particularly 
Improving  waste  management, 
increasing  recycling,  rolling-out  separate  collection 
and reducing landfilling; 

  Reducing  resource  intensity  which  would  lessen 
the exposure of Latvian businesses to rising resource 
costs.  

Main Opportunities 

Latvia  could  perform  better  on  topics  where  there  is 
already a good knowledge base and good practices. This 
applies in particular to: 

  Use  of  the  opportunities  provided  by  EIB  loans  and 
EFSI  support  to  further  promote  environmental 
projects; 

efficiency, 

  Use  of  market  based  instruments  to  encourage 
in  waste 

resource 
management and in water resources management; 
  High potential for Green Infrastructure development 
in  order  to  address  flood  and  erosion  risks,  while 
improving the connectivity of natural areas. 

particularly 

Points of Excellence 

As  Latvia  is  a  leader  on  environmental  implementation, 
innovative approaches could be shared more widely with 
other countries. Good examples are: 

  Good  compliance  record,  having  a  low  number  of 

complaints and infringements.  

1  European  Union,  Communication  "Delivering  the  benefits  of  EU 
Environmental 
through 

environmental 
Implementation Review" (COM/2016/ 316 final). 

policies 

regular 

a 

2 Decision No. 1386/2013/EU of 20 November 2013 on a General Union 
Environmental  Action  Programme  to  2020  "Living  well,  within  the 
limits of our planet". 

3 United Nations, 2015. The Sustainable Development Goals  
4 This EIR report does not cover climate change, chemicals and energy. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
 
Part I: Thematic Areas 

1. Turning the EU into a circular, resource-efficient, green and 

competitive low-carbon economy 

Latvia  5 

Developing  a  circular  economy  and  improving 
resource efficiency 

The 2015 Circular Economy Package emphasizes the need 
to  move  towards  a  lifecycle-driven  ‘circular’  economy, 
with a cascading use of resources and residual waste that 
is  close  to  zero.  This  can  be  facilitated  by  the 
development  of,  and  access  to,  innovative  financial 
instruments and funding for eco-innovation. 

SDG  8  invites  countries  to  promote  sustained,  inclusive 
and  sustainable  economic  growth,  full  and  productive 
employment  and  decent  work  for  all.  SDG  9  highlights 
infrastructure,  promote 
the  need  to  build  resilient 
inclusive  and  sustainable  industrialization  and  foster 
innovation.  SDG  12  encourages  countries  to  achieve 
the sustainable management and efficient use of natural 
resources by 2030. 

Measures towards a circular economy 

Transforming our economies from linear to circular offers 
an  opportunity  to  reinvent  them  and  make  them  more 
stimulate 
sustainable  and  competitive.  This  will 
investments and bring both short and long-term benefits 
for the economy, environment and citizens alike.5 

(how 

resource 

productivity6 
efficiently 
Latvia's 
the economy uses material resources to produce wealth), 
in  2014  in  terms  of  value  produced  per  kg  of  resources 
used  is  0.5  EUR/kg,  above  an  EU  average  of  2 EUR/kg7. 
Figure  1  shows  that  Latvia's  resource  productivity  has 
remained relatively stable since 2011.  

Latvia  is  gradually  moving  towards  more  eco-innovation 
but the speed depends largely on availability of financial 
resources  .There  is  much  scope  for  work  in  the  area  of 
public awareness and financial planning in order to foster 
more 
eco-innovation 
conditions 
development in Latvia.   

favourable 

for 

In  Latvia  responsibility  for  the  policies  related  to  eco-
innovation and circular economy is split among a range of 
institutions,  primarily  the  Ministry  of  Economy,  Ministry 
of  Education  and  Science  and  Ministry  of Environmental 
Protection and Regional Development. 

Figure 1: Resource productivity 2003-158 

In  the  Sustainable  Development  Strategy  for  Latvia  until 
20309  one  of  the  priorities  is  “Nature  as  future  capital”, 
which  aims  to  position  Latvia  as  a  leader  in  protection, 
promotion  and  sustainable  use  of  ecosystem  services. 
In addition,  the  National  Development  Plan  2014-202010 
integrates  sustainability  concerns 
into  a  number  of 
including  economic  growth,  energy 
priority  areas, 
efficiency  and  energy  production,  growth-oriented 
territorial  development  and  sustainable  management  of 
natural and cultural capital.  

Targeted  policy  documents  for  promoting  and  utilising 
the principles of circular economy are in the early stages 
of development. The Declaration of the new Government 
of  Latvia  adopted  in  February  2016  highlights  waste 
management,  alternative  fuels  and  bioeconomy  as 
priorities. 

SMEs and resource efficiency 
In  the  Flash  Eurobarometer  426  "SMEs,  resource 
efficiency  and  green  markets"11  it  is  shown  that  47%  of 
Latvia's Small and Medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have 
invested    up  to  5%  of  their  annual  turnover  in  their 
resource  efficiency  actions  (EU28  average  50%),  17%  of 
them  are  currently  offering  green  products  and  services 
(EU28 average 26%), 61% took measures to save energy 
(EU28  average  59%),  38% 
to  minimise  waste 
(EU28 average  60%),  41%  to  save  water  (EU28  average 
44%),  and  58%  to  save  materials  (EU28  average  54%). 

5 European Commission, 2015. Proposed Circular Economy Package 
6 Resource productivity is defined as the ratio between gross domestic 

product (GDP) and domestic material consumption (DMC). 

7 Eurostat, Resource productivity, accessed October 2016 

8 Eurostat, Resource productivity, accessed October 2016 
9 Sustainable Development Strategy for Latvia until 2030 
10 National Development Plan 2014-2020 
11  European  Commission,  2015.  Flash  426  Eurobarometer  "SMEs, 

resource efficiency and green markets" 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
                                                            
recycle  by 

From a circular economy perspective, 16% took measures 
to 
reusing  material  or  waste  within 
the company  (EU28  average  40%),  19%  to  design 
products  that  are  easier  to  maintain,  repair  or  reuse 
(EU28 average 22%) and 17% were able to sell their scrap 
material to another company (EU28 average 25%).   

According  to  the  Flash  Eurobarometer426,  resource 
efficiency  actions  allowed  the  reduction  of  production 
costs in 44% of Latvian SMEs (EU28 average 45%). 

The Flash Eurobarometer 426 "SMEs, resource efficiency 
and green markets" shows that 47% of the SMEs in Latvia 
have one or more full time employee working in a green 
job  at  least  some  of  the  time  (EU28  average  35%). 
Latvia has  an  average  number  of  2.1  full  time  green 
employees per SME (EU28 average 1.7%).   

Eco-Innovation 
The key eco-innovation areas in Latvia have not changed 
markedly  in  recent  years.  Sectors  that  continue  to 
develop include renewable energy and energy efficiency 
in  residential  buildings,  forest-based  industries  and  eco-
cosmetics.  In  addition,  service  sectors  that  use  Latvia’s 
‘green image’ as a key selling point – e.g. tourism, leisure 
and  recreation  and  organic  agriculture  –  maintain  their 
activities.  

Among the developing eco-innovation areas in Latvia one 
can  highlight  electromobility.  In  2014  the  Ministry  of 
Transport  elaborated  the  Electromobility  Development 
Plan  of  Latvia  2014-2016.  The  plan  has  been  prepared 
with  a  long-term  view  to  fully  integrate  this  area  into 
transport  policy  as  a  way  to  decrease  the  use  of  fossil 
fuels,  CO2  emissions  and  noise  levels.  This  includes  the 
support  to  new  means  of  electromobility  and  the 
establishment of their charging infrastructure.  

Through  the  Climate  Change  Financial  Instrument,  the 
Ministry  of  the  Environmental  Protection  and  Regional 
Development  has  provided  financial  support  for  the 
implementation of 102 Projects where electrical vehicles 
were  purchased  and  public  charging  infrastructure  was 
installed. 

in  Latvia,  a  stronger 

In  terms  of  recent  actions  by  established  cleantech 
companies 
focus  on  water 
management and purification can be observed, as well as 
infrastructure 
on 
development and monitoring.  

technologies 

to  water 

related 

The  green  technology  start-up  scene  in  Latvia  sees  new 
ideas  and  enterprises  incubated  in  a  wide  range  of 
sectors, 
energy, 
ecodesign,  eco-innovative  solutions  in  construction,  LED 
lightning 
and 
metalworking to develop material characteristics that are 

electromobility,  wind 

composite  materials 

applications, 

including 

Latvia  6 

necessary to substitute rare natural resources 12.   

The  overall  position  of  Latvia  in  the  Eco  Innovation 
Scoreboard (Eco-IS) has improved from 24th place in 2013 
(55 points) to 20th place in 2015 (74.9 points) as shown 
in Figure 2.   
Figure 2: Eco-Innovation Index 2015 (EU=100)13 

The main drivers for eco-innovation in Latvia are certainly 
the  energy  and  resource  efficiency  targets  of  the  EU’s 
Europe  2020  strategy,  which  have  been  integrated  in 
national  policy  documents  and  corresponding  funding 
lines,  most  notably  the  EU  Structural  Funds  envelope. 
Together with national co-financing Latvia plans to invest 
around  EUR  550  million  in  research,  development  and 
innovation  (RDI),  EUR  565  million  in  transition  to  low-
carbon  economy  and  EUR  733  million  in  environmental 
protection  and  resource  efficiency  by  2020  (Ministry  of 
Finance, 2014). The Latvian Smart Specialisation Strategy 
emphasises  the  focus  on  developing  bioeconomy,  smart 
materials  and  sustainable  energy  solutions  as  three  out 
of  five  key  areas  for  RDI  investment.  This  ensures  a 
sustained  political  and 
for 
the development  of  the  green  economy  –  an  area  that 
previously  has  not  been  high  on  the  political  agenda  in 
Latvia. 

financial  commitment 

Equally  important  is  the  increasing  support  to  eco-

12 Neimanis, M., 2016, Interview. 
13 Eco-innovation Observatory: Eco-Innovation scoreboard 2015 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
from 

other 

such  as 

international 
the  Norwegian 

funding 
innovation 
programmes, 
Financial 
Mechanism. In 2014, with the support of the Norwegian 
Financial  Mechanism’s  programme,  “Green 
Industry 
incubator  was 
Innovation”, 
launched in Latvia, which was the first innovation support 
instrument  specifically  dedicated  to  the  development  of 
eco-innovative 
eco-innovative 
entrepreneurship in the country.  

the  Green 

technology 

companies 

and 

The  richness  of  natural  capital  such  as  forests,  soil  and 
water can also be identified as drivers of eco-innovation. 
Almost  half  of  Latvia’s  territory  is  made  up  of  natural 
ecosystems.  Low  population  density  and  relatively  low 
levels  of  industrial  pollution  highlight  the  “green  image” 
of  the country,  making  it  a  good  destination  for  eco-
tourism  and  travel.  Consequently,  it  also  promotes  a 
wide  range  of  eco-innovation  businesses  and  related 
activities.  

The  main  barriers  to  eco-innovation  development  and 
diffusion  in  Latvia  are  related  to  the  small  number  and 
size  of  companies  active  in  environmental  technology 
fields  and  the  low  innovative  capacity  of  companies  in 
general,  especially  in  the  medium  and  high-tech  fields. 
In addition,  the  very  limited  number  of  large  companies 
that have resources to divert to RDI and new technology 
adoption,  and  the  low  level  of  early-stage  investments 
that are available for green technology development, are 
important hampering factors14. 

awareness 

NGOs  have  been  active  in  initiating  cultural  change  and 
positive  influence  from  forerunner  countries  on  societal 
and  entrepreneurial 
should  not  be 
underestimated.  While  the  demand  for  eco-innovation 
products has been increasing in recent years, price is still 
a  dominant  factor  in  consumer  and  producer  choice, 
which  limits  incentives  for  entrepreneurs  to  engage  in 
eco-innovative activities.  

Latvia  does  not  have a  specific  green  growth  policy.  But 
Sustainable  Development  Strategy  of  Latvia  until  2030 
has  a  special  chapter  on  Innovative  and  eco-efficient 
economy.  Besides,  elements  of  eco-innovations  are  in 
chapter  on  Nature  as  capital  for  future,  where  several 
instruments  and  initiatives  are  suggested  to  maintain 
natural  capital,  for  example,  green  budget  reform, 
market  instruments,  support  to  firms  and  technologies 
that  are  eco-innovative.  The  Smart  Specialisation 
Strategy  aims  to  promote  innovation  capacity  and  the 
creation  of  a  system  that  fosters  and  technological 
progress.  Its  priorities,  amongst  others,  include  support 
to  the  knowledge-based  bio-economy,  smart  materials 
and  smart  energy.  Green  growth  and  circular  economy 
vocabulary is being adopted gradually from EU directives, 

14 Brieze, I., 2013, Latvia is the second most green country in Europe. A 
myth or reality? Interview with the manager of the INTERREG project 
Global 

Latvia  7 

but  their  implications  in  the  context  of  the  national 
economy  have  to  be  still  assessed  to  find  the  best 
solutions.  Though,  overreliance  on  the  EU  and  EEA 
financial  mechanisms  create  a fragmented  support 
landscape  that  is  not  favourable  to  long-term  green 
industry development. 

Waste management  

Turning waste into a resource requires: 
 

implementation  of  Union  waste 

Full 
legislation, 
which  includes  the  waste  hierarchy;  the  need  to 
ensure  separate  collection  of  waste;  the  landfill 
diversion targets etc. 

  Reducing  per  capita  waste  generation  and  waste 

 

generation in absolute terms. 
Limiting energy recovery to non-recyclable materials 
recyclable  or 
and  phasing  out 
recoverable waste. 

landfilling  of 

SDG  12  invites  countries  to  substantially  reduce  waste 
generation  through  prevention,  reduction,  recycling  and 
reuse, by 2030. 

The EU's approach to waste management is based on the 
"waste  hierarchy"  which  sets  out  an  order  of  priority 
when  shaping  waste  policy  and  managing  waste  at 
the operational  level:  prevention,  (preparing  for)  reuse, 
recycling,  recovery  and,  as  the  least  preferred  option, 
disposal  (which 
incineration 
without energy recovery). The progress towards reaching 
the  adoption  of  adequate 
recycling 
WMP/WPP15  should  be  the  key  items  to  measure  the 
performance  of  Member  States.  This  section  focuses  on 
management of municipal waste16 for which EU law sets 
mandatory recycling targets.  

landfilling  and 

targets  and 

includes 

The  amount  of  municipal  waste  generated  in  Latvia 
amounted to 325 kg/y/inhabitant in 2014 (well below the 
EU average of 475 kg/y/inhabitant).17 

Figure  3  depicts  the  municipal  waste  by  treatment  in 
Latvia in terms of kg per capita, which shows a decrease 
in recycling and an increase in landfilling. 

The  main  treatment  option  of  municipal  waste  remains 
disposal in landfills. In 2014, Latvia landfilled a big share 
of municipal waste (79% in 2014, a slight drop from 83% 
in  2013)  against  the  EU  average  of  26%.  Composting  is 
broadly  stable  at  only  4%  in  2014  (EU  average  28%  in 
2014). 

15 Waste Management Plans/Waste Prevention Programmes 
16  Municipal  waste  consists  of  waste  collected  by  or  on  behalf  of 
municipal  authorities,  or  directly  by  the  private  sector  (business  or 
private non-profit institutions) not on behalf of municipalities. 

17  Eurostat,  Municipal  waste  and  treatment,  by  type  of  treatment 

method, accessed October 2016 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
                                                            
Figure  3: Municipal  waste by  treatment  in  Latvia  2007-
1418 

Latvia  8 

The national Waste Management Plan 2013-2020 will be 
subject  to  a  midterm  review  in  2016.  The  plan  also 
includes Latvia's Waste Prevention Programme. 

Although Latvia has achieved some progress in municipal 
the  past  couple  years, 
waste  management  over 
significant investments are still required. These include: 
  putting  in  place  infrastructure  to  improve  separate 
increase  waste  recycling 

waste  collection  and 
capacity (packaging and biodegradable waste),  

  making 

in  market 

improvements 

instruments 
(taxation  of  polluting  products,  extended  producer 
responsibility), and  
adapting  administrative  and  regulatory  measures  to 
facilitate recovery, including composting. 

 

As  shown  in  Figure  4,  recycling  of  municipal  waste 
increased only slightly from 17% in 2013 to 21% in 2014  
(EU  average  was  44%  in  2014),  while  composting  of 
municipal waste in Latvia dropped from 6% in 2013 to 4% 
in 2014 (EU average being 16% in 2014). This means that 
Latvia  is  under  an  increasing  risk  of  not  meeting  50% 
recycling target by 202019, and the 2020 landfill diversion 
targets for biodegradable waste (75%). 
Figure 4: Recycling rate of municipal waste 2007-1420 

In  order  to  make  recycling  economically  viable,  an 
(mechanical  biological 
tax 
incineration  and  MBT 
treatment),  whilst  keeping  the  landfill  tax  higher  than 
taxes  for  incineration  and  MBT,  would  be  effective. 
In order  to  help  bridging  the  implementation  gap  in 
Latvia,  the  Commission  has  delivered  a  roadmap21  for 
compliance in which economic instruments play a crucial 
role.  Revenues  from  a  landfill  tax  in  conjunction  with 
further refinement of the allocation of the CF (allocations 
should  be  prioritised  to  the  first  steps  of  the waste 
hierarchy)  could  contribute  to  building  and  operating 
the infrastructure required to meet EU targets. 

turnover  of 

Full  implementation  of  the  existing  legislation  could 
create  more  than  2.800  jobs  in  Latvia  and  increase  the 
annual 
sector  by  over 
EUR 304 million.  Moving  towards  the  targets  of  the 
Roadmap  on  resource  efficiency  could  create  over  3300 
additional  jobs  and  increase  the  annual  turnover  of  the 
waste sector by over EUR 350 million.22 

the  waste 

Suggested action 

  Introduce  and  gradually 

increase 

landfill  taxes  to 
phase-out  landfilling  of  recyclable  and  recoverable 
waste.  Use the  revenues  to  support  the  separate 
collection and alternative infrastructure in conjunction 
with a better allocation of the cohesion policy funds to 
the  first  steps  of  waste  hierarchy.  Avoid  building 
excessive  infrastructure  for  the  treatment  of  residual 
waste. 

  Focus  on  implementation  of  the  effective  separate 
collection scheme to increase recycling rates. Once this 
is  in  place  consider  introducing  PAYT  (Pay  As  You 
Throw) schemes. 

18  Eurostat,  Municipal  waste  and  treatment,  by  type  of  treatment 

method, accessed October 2016 

19 Member States may choose a different method than the one used by 
ESTAT (and referred to in this report) to calculate their recycling rates 
and  track  compliance  with  the  2020  target  of  50%  recycling  of 
municipal waste. 

20 Eurostat, Recycling rate of municipal waste, accessed October 2016 

21  European  Commission,  Support  to  Member  States  in  improving 
waste  management  based  on  assessment  of  Member  States’ 
performance. Roadmap for Latvia 

22 Bio Intelligence service, 2011. Implementing EU Waste legislation for 
Green Growth, study for European Commission. The breakdown per 
country on job creation was made by the consultant on Commission 
demand but was not included in the published document.   

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
                                                            
2. Protecting, conserving and enhancing natural capital

Latvia  9 

Nature and Biodiversity  

The  EU  Biodiversity  Strategy  aims  to  halt  the  loss  of 
biodiversity  in  the  EU  by  2020,  restore  ecosystems  and 
their services in so far as feasible, and step up efforts to 
avert  global  biodiversity  loss.  The  EU  Birds  and  Habitats 
Directives  aim  at  achieving  favourable  conservation 
status of protected species and habitats.  

SDG  14  requires  countries  to  conserve  and  sustainably 
use the oceans, seas and marine resources, while SDG 15 
requires  countries  to  protect,  restore  and  promote  the 
sustainable  use  of  terrestrial  ecosystems,  sustainably 
manage  forests,  combat  desertification,  and  halt  and 
reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. 

The  1992  EU  Habitats  Directive  and  the  1979  Birds 
Directive are the cornerstone of the European legislation 
aimed  at  the  conservation  of  the  EU's  wildlife.  Natura 
2000, the largest coordinated network of protected areas 
in  the  world,  is  the  key  instrument  to  achieve  and 
implement the Directives' objectives to ensure the  long-
term  protection,  conservation  and  survival  of  Europe's 
most  valuable  and  threatened  species  and  habitats  and 
the ecosystems they underpin. 

The  adequate  designation  of  protected  sites  as  Special 
Ares  of  Conservation  (SAC)  under  the  Habitats  Directive 
and  as  Special  Protection  Areas  (SPA)  under  the  Birds 
Directive 
is  a  key  milestone  towards  meeting  the 
objectives  of  the  Directives.  The  results  of  Habitats 
Directive Article 17 and Birds Directive Article 12 reports 
and  the  progress  towards  adequate  Sites  of  Community 
Importance (SCI)-SPA and SAC designation23 both in land 
and  at  sea,  should  be  the  key  items  to  measure  the 
performance of Member States. 

11.53%  of  the  national  land area of  Latvia is  covered  by 
Natura  2000  (EU  average  18.1%),  with  Birds  Directive 
SPAs  covering  10.23%  (EU  average  12.3%).  Latvia  has 
designated  332  Special  Areas  of  Conservation  (SACs) 
covering    an  area  of  12241,37  km2,  from  which  7877.3 
km2  correspond  to  the  terrestrial  part  of  the  country's 
share  of  the  Natura  2000  network,  and  4364.07  km2  to 
marine  sites.  Regarding  Special  Protection  Areas  (SPAs) 
for birds designated under the Birds Directive, Latvia has 
designated  102  sites  covering  6609.6  km2,  from  which 
6183.9 correspond to terrestrial sites (97) and 425.7 km2 
to marine sites. 

23  Sites  of  Community  Importance  (SCIs)  are  designated  pursuant  to 
the Habitats Directive whereas Special Areas of Protection (SPAs) are 
designated  pursuant  to  the  Birds  Directive;  figures  of  coverage  do 
not add up due to the fact that some SCIs and SPAs overlap. Special 
Areas of Conservation (SACs) means a SCI designated by the Member 
States. 

The  latest  assessment24    of  the  SCIs  part  of  the  Natura 
2000  network  shows  that  there  are  insufficiencies  in 
designation (see Figure 525). 

Figure  5:  Sufficiency  assessment  of  SCI  networks  in 
Latvia based on the situation until December 2013 (%)26  

Even  though  Latvia  is  progressing  towards  establishing 
comprehensive  management  plans  for  its  sites  (already 
completed  for  about  60  SACs),  both  the  scientific  basis 
over  which  the  network  was  developed  as  well  as 
the actual conservation status27 of some of the protected 
species and habitats is currently under review.   

The  acknowledged  presence  of  significant  gaps  in  the 
knowledge  base  required  for  a  sound  science  based 
implementation  of  the  Habitats  and  Birds  Directives, 
starting  from  the  designations  carried  out  in  2004,  is  a 
recognized shortcoming that undermines any attempt of 
a  more  factual  assessment  of  the  actual  state  of  the 

24  For  each  Member  State,  the  Commission  assesses  whether  the 
species  and  habitat  types  on  Annexes  I  and  II  of  the  Habitats 
Directive,  are  sufficiently  represented  by  the  sites  designated  to 
date.  This  is  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  species  and  habitats  for 
which further areas need to be designated in order to complete the 
network  in  that  country.  The  current  data,  which  were  assessed  in 
2014-2015, reflect the situation up until December 2013. 

25 The percentages in Figure 5 refer to percentages of the total number 
of assessments (one assessment covering 1 species or 1 habitat in a 
given biographical region with the Member State); if a habitat type or 
a species occurs in more than 1 Biogeographic region within a given 
Member State, there will be as many individual assessments as there 
are Biogeographic regions with an occurrence of that species or 
habitat in this Member State. 

26 European Commission, internal assessment. 
27  Conservation  status  is  assessed  using  a  standard  methodology  as 
being 
and 
‘unfavourable-bad’, based on four parameters as defined in Article 1 
of the Habitats Directive. 

‘unfavourable-inadequate’ 

‘favourable’, 

either 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
                                                            
Latvia  10 

Figure 630.  

Only  2%  and  4.5%  of  the unfavourable  assessments 
respectively  for  habitats  and  species  were  showing  a 
positive trend in 2013.  

As shown in Figure 7, as far as birds are concerned, 41% 
of the breeding species showed short-term increasing or 
stable population trends (for wintering species this figure 
was 67%). 

Figure  7:  Short-term  population  trend  of  breeding  and 
wintering bird species in Latvia in 2012 (%)31 

species  and  habitats  requiring  protection  in  the  Latvian 
territory. The Latvian authorities are currently producing 
an  updated  survey  of  the  spatial  distribution  of  habitats 
and  species  that  should  help  to  clarify  the  situation  and 
to overcome current shortages.  

located 

From  the  available  information  it  is  evident  that  those 
assets 
in  areas  shared  with  agriculture  or 
commercial  forestry  activities  are  under  most  pressure. 
This  unfavorable  situation  is  particularly  evident  in  the 
case  of  the  habitats  based  on  grasslands.  The  current 
provisions  for  the  funding  of  nature  conservation  would 
need  to  be  adapted  so  as  to  make  the  management  of 
the land for nature conservation objectives economically 
viable for commercial farmers, or foresters.   

Figure 6: Conservation status of habitats and species in 
Latvia in 2007/2013 (%)28 

So  far,  there  is  no  involvement  of  Latvia  in  the  EU 
initiative on Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and 
their Services (MAES).32 However, several LIFE + projects 
for  pilot  assessment  of  the  ecosystem  services  can  be 
noted.33 

Suggested action 

  Complete the SAC designation process and put in place 
the 
clearly  defined  conservation  objectives  and 
necessary  conservation  measures  for  the  sites  and 
provide  adequate  resources  for  their  implementation 
in  order  to  maintain/restore  species  and  habitats  of 
community interest to a favourable conservation status 
across their natural range.  

  Improve  the  incentives  for  foresters  and  farmers  to 

better protect forest and grassland habitat.  

  Initiate  and  provide  government  support  for  the  work 
on  mapping  and  assessment  of  ecosystems  and  their 

30 Please note that a direct comparison between 2007 and 2013 data is 
complicated by the fact that Bulgaria and Romania were not covered 
by  the  2007  reporting  cycle,  that  the  ‘unknown’  assessments  have 
strongly diminished particularly for species, and that some  reported 
changes  are  not  genuine  as  they  result  from  improved  data  / 
monitoring methods. 

31  Article  12  of  the  Birds  Directive  reporting  -  national  summary  of 

Latvia 

32  Ecosystem  services  are  benefits  provided  by  nature  such  as  food, 

clean water and pollination on which human society depends. 

33  LIFE13  ENV/LV/000839 "Assessment  of  ecosystems  and  their 
services  for  nature  biodiversity  conservation  and  management"; 
LIFE12  BIO/LV/001130  LIFE  GRASSSERVICE  -  Alternative  use  of 
biomass  for  maintenance  of  grassland  biodiversity  and  ecosystem 
services  

According to the latest report on the conservation status 
of  habitats  and  species  covered  by  the  Habitats 
Directive29,  10.53%  of 
the  habitats  biogeographic 
assessments  were  favourable  in  2013  (EU  27:  16%). 
Furthermore,  35%  are  considered  to  be  unfavourable–
inadequate (EU27: 47%) and 51% are unfavourable – bad 
(EU27:  30%).  As for 
the 
in  2013,  39%  at 
assessments  were 
21% 
unfavourable-inadequate 
unfavourable-bad status (EU27: 18%). This is depicted in 

the  species,  28.83%  of 

favourable 

(EU27: 

42%) 

and 

28  These  figures  show  the  percentage  of  biogeographical  assessments 
in each category of conservation status for habitats and species (one 
assessment  covering  1  species  or  1  habitat  in  a  given  biographical 
region  with  the  Member  State),  respectively.  The  information  is 
based  on  Article  17  of  the  Habitats  Directive  reporting  -  national 
summary of Latvia 

29 Article 17 requires a report to be sent to the European Commission 
every 6 years following an agreed format. The core of the ‘Article 17’ 
report  is  assessment  of  conservation  status  of  the  habitats  and 
species targeted by the Habitats Directive. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
 
                                                            
services, valuation and development of natural capital 
accounting systems. 

Green Infrastructure  
The  EU  strategy  on  green  infrastructure34  promotes  the 
incorporation  of  green  infrastructure  into  related  plans 
and  programmes  to  help  overcome  fragmentation  of 
habitats  and  preserve  or  restore  ecological  connectivity, 
enhance  ecosystem  resilience  and  thereby  ensure  the 
continued provision of ecosystem services. 

Green  Infrastructure  provides  ecological,  economic  and 
social  benefits  through  natural  solutions.  It  helps  to 
understand the value of the benefits that nature provides 
to human society and to mobilise investments to sustain 
and enhance them. 

Latvia  has  a  relatively  high  density  of  natural  areas 
compared 
to  many  other  EU  Member  States. 
Nevertheless,  further  efforts  to  increase  connectivity 
between habitats would be useful35.  

Latvia  11 

of a LIFE+ funded project36. 

Soil protection  

further  soil  degradation  and 

The  EU  Soil  Thematic  Strategy  highlights  the  need  to 
ensure  a  sustainable  use  of  soils.  This  requires  the 
prevention  of 
the 
preservation of its functions, as well as the restoration of 
degraded  soils.  The  2011  Road  Map  for  Resource-
Efficient  Europe,  part  of  Europe  2020  Strategy  provides 
that  by  2020,  EU  policies  take  into  account  their  direct 
and  indirect  impact  on  land  use  in  the  EU  and  globally, 
and  the  rate  of  land  take  is  on  track  with  an  aim  to 
achieve no net land take by 2050. 

SDG  15  requires  countries  to  combat  desertification, 
restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by 
desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve 
a land-degradation-neutral world by 2030. 

Soil is an important resource for life and the economy. It 
provides  key  ecosystem  services  including  the  provision 
of food, fibre and biomass for renewable energy, carbon 
sequestration,  water  purification  and  flood  regulation, 
the provision of raw and building material. Soil is a finite 
and  extremely 
increasingly 
degrading  in  the  EU.  Land  taken  by  urban  development 
and infrastructure is highly unlikely to be reverted to its 
natural  state;  it  consumes  mostly  agricultural  land  and 
increases  fragmentation  of  habitats.  Soil  protection  is 
indirectly  addressed  in  existing EU policies  in  areas  such 
as  agriculture,  water,  waste,  chemicals,  and  prevention 
of industrial pollution. 

resource  and 

fragile 

Challenges  relate  e.g.  to  the  lack  of  general  strategic 
policy framework for Green Infrastructure development; 
lack  of  know-how  and  awareness 
(especially  at 
the municipal level) and lack of public participation.  

Nine  border  municipalities  in  Latvia  and  Lithuania  are 
cooperating  under  the  motto  “Let’s  make  our  cities 
greener”  in  order  to  restore  urban  parks  and  green 
infrastructure;  improve  the  wellbeing,  awareness  and 
engagement  of  citizens  to  maintain  green  areas  in  their 
neighbourhood;  and  enable  city  planners  to  integrate 
green infrastructure in urban space. 

The  operational  programme  "Growth  and  Employment" 
envisages the green infrastructure solutions as a priority 
where they are technically and economically possible and 
efficient, including eco-system based approaches' for the 
activities  reducing  flood  and  erosion  risks  in  affected 
ecosystems  -  grasslands,  wetlands,  dunes  and  forests. 
Priorities for restoration will be set within the framework 

34 European Union, Green Infrastructure — Enhancing Europe’s Natural 

Capital, COM/2013/0249 

Artificial  land  cover  is  used  for  settlements,  production 
systems and infrastructure. It may itself be split between 
built-up areas (buildings) and non-built-up areas (such as 
linear transport networks and associated areas). 

The  annual  land  take  rate  (growth  of  artificial  areas)  as 
provided by CORINE Land Cover was 0.38% in Latvia over 
the  period  2006-12,  below  the  EU  average  (0.41%).  It 
represented 475 hectares per year and was mainly driven 
by  housing,  services  and  recreation  as  well  as  industrial 
and commercial sites37. The percentage of built up land in 
2009 was 1.11%, well below the EU average (3.23%)38. 

The soil water erosion rate in 2010 was 0.32 tonnes per 
ha per year, well below EU28 average (2.46 tonnes)39.  

Figure 8 shows the different land cover types in Latvia in 
2012. 

36  LIFE,  NAT-PROGRAMME  -  National  Conservation  and  Management 

Programme for Natura 2000 Sites in Latvia  

37 European Environment Agency Draft results of CORINE Land Cover 

(CLC) inventory 2012; mean annual land take 2006-12 as a % of 2006 
artificial land. 

38  European  Environment  Agency,  2016. 

Imperviousness  and 

35  Service  Contract  "Supporting  the 

implementation  of  Green 

imperviousness change 

Infrastructure” (2015), Green Infrastructure in Latvia Factsheet 

39 Eurostat, Soil water erosion rate, accessed June 2016  

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
                                                            
Figure 8: Land Cover types in Latvia in 201240 

There are still no EU-wide datasets enabling the provision 
of  benchmark  indicators  for  soil  organic  matter  decline, 
contaminated sites, pressures on soil biology and diffuse 
pollution.  An  updated  inventory  and  assessment  of  soil 
protection  policy  instruments  in  Latvia  and  other  EU 
Member  States  is  being  performed  by  the  EU  Expert 
Group on Soil Protection. 

Marine protection 

The EU Coastal and Marine Policy and legislation require 
that by 2020 the impact of pressures on marine waters is 
reduced  to  achieve  or  maintain  good  environmental 
status and coastal zones are managed sustainably. 

SDG  14  requires  countries  to  conserve  and  sustainably 
use  the  oceans,  seas  and  marine  resources 
for 
sustainable development. 
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)41 aims 
to  achieve  Good  Environmental  Status  (GES)  of  the  EU's 
marine  waters  by  2020  by  providing  an  ecosystem 
approach  to  the  management  of  human  activities  with 
impact  on  the  marine  environment.  The  Directive 
requires  Member  States  to  develop  and  implement 
a marine strategy for their marine waters, and cooperate 
with  Member  States  sharing  the  same  marine  region  or 
subregion. 

As part of their marine strategies, Member States had to 
make  an  initial  assessment  of  their  marine  waters, 

40  European  Environment  Agency,  Land  cover  2012  and  changes 

country analysis [publication forthcoming] 

Latvia  12 

determine  GES42  and  establish  environmental  targets  by 
July  2012.  They  also  had  to  establish  monitoring 
programmes for the on-going assessment of their marine 
waters  by  July  2014.  The  next  element  of  their  marine 
strategy is to establish a Programme of Measures (2016). 
The  Commission  assesses  whether  these  elements 
constitute  an  appropriate  framework  to  meet  the 
requirements of the MSFD. 

Latvian  marine  waters  are  part  of  the  Baltic  Sea  and 
Latvia  is  a  party  to  the  Convention  on  the  Protection  of 
the  Marine  Environment  of  the  Baltic  Sea  (HELCOM). 
In the  Baltic  Sea,  main  risks  for  biodiversity  relate  to 
eutrophication,  overfishing  and  bycatch,  pollution  by 
contaminants and oil and introduction of non-indigenous 
species43. 

In its implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework 
(MSFD),  Latvia  did  not  determine  good 
Directive 
environmental  status  for  all  the  11  MSFD  descriptors.44 
Latvia  also  reported  that  the  current  level  of  impacts  is 
'good'  when  assessing  the  state  of  its  marine  waters. 
It however provided no justification for this assessment.  

It is therefore too early to say whether Latvian waters are 
in  good  status  as  there  were  weaknesses  in  identifying 
what a good environmental status is in the first place. 

Latvia established a monitoring programme of its marine 
waters in 2014. However, its monitoring programmes for 
all descriptors need further refinement and development 
to  constitute  an  appropriate  framework  to  monitor 
progress  towards  achieving  Good  Environmental  Status, 
especially  since  gaps  are  still  prevalent  and  the 
monitoring programmes will not be in place before 2018 
for  most  descriptors,  when  the  next  assessment  of 
marine waters is due45. 

In  2012,  Latvian  marine  protected  areas  covered 
4382,8 square  kilometers  of  its  marine  waters  in  the 
Baltic Sea46. 

Suggested action 

  Continue  work  to  improve  the  definitions  of  GES  in 
including 
for  biodiversity  descriptors, 
particular 
through regional cooperation by using the work of the 
relevant Regional Sea Convention. 

42 The MSFD defines Good Environmental Status (GES) in Article 3 as: 
“The  environmental  status  of  marine  waters  where  these  provide 
ecologically  diverse  and  dynamic  oceans  and  seas  which  are  clean, 
healthy and productive” 

43 European Environment, 2016, The Baltic Sea  
44 Report from the Commission "The first phase of implementation of 
the  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  (2008/56/EC)  -  The 
European Commission's assessment and guidance" COM(2014)097 

45  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  Accompanying 

the 
Commission  Report 
States'  monitoring 
assessing  Member 
programmes  under  the  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive 
(COM(2017)3 and SWD(2017)1 final) 

46  2012  Data  provided  by  the  European  Environmental  Agency  to  the 

41 European Union, Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC 

European Commission– Not published 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
                                                            
Latvia  13 

  Identify and address knowledge gaps. 
  Further 

develop 

(and 
approaches 
quantifying) impacts from the main pressures in order 
to  lead  to  improved  and  more  conclusive  assessment 
results for 2018 reporting. 

assessing 

  Continue  integrating  monitoring  programmes  already 
to 
joint  monitoring 
level,  for 

existing  under 
implement,  where 
programmes  developed  at  (sub)regional 
instance by HELCOM. 

legislation  and 

relevant  EU 

they  exist, 

  Enhance  comparability  and  consistency  of  monitoring 

methods within the country's marine region. 

  Ensure that its monitoring programme is implemented 
without  delay,  addresses  all  descriptors  and 
is 
appropriate to monitor progress towards its GES. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. Ensuring citizens' health and quality of life 

Latvia  14 

Air quality  

The  EU  Clean  Air  Policy  and  legislation  require  that  air 
quality  in  the  Union  is  significantly  improved,  moving 
closer  to  the  WHO  recommended  levels.  Air  pollution 
and its impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity should be 
further reduced with the long-term aim of not exceeding 
critical  loads  and  levels.  This  requires  strengthening 
efforts  to  reach  full  compliance  with  Union  air  quality 
legislation  and  defining  strategic  targets  and  actions 
beyond 2020. 

the  currently  applicable  national  emission 

within 
ceilings50. 

for 

the 

year 

Air quality in Latvia is reported to be generally good, with 
exceptions.  Nevertheless, 
2013, 
the European Environment Agency estimated that about 
2  080  premature  deaths  were  attributable  to  fine 
particulate  matter51  concentrations,  60 
to  ozone 
concentration52  and  over  110  to  nitrogen  dioxide53 
concentrations54.  This  is  due  also  to  exceedances  above 
the EU air quality standards such as shown in Figure 955.  

The  EU  has  developed  a  comprehensive  suite  of  air 
legislation48,  which  establishes  health-based 
quality 
standards  and  objectives  for  a  number  of  air  pollutants. 
As  part  of  this,  Member  States  are  also  required  to 
Figure 9: Attainment situation for PM10, NO2 and O3 in 201447 

Until  2013,  Latvia  reported  exceedances  of  particulate 
matter  (PM10)  in  one  air  quality  zone  (Riga);  however, 
for  2014  compliance  has  been  reported.  For 2014, 
exceedances  above  the  EU  air  quality  standards  have 

that  up-to-date 

ensure 
information  on  ambient 
concentrations  of  different  air  pollutants  is  routinely 
made  available  to  the  public.  In  addition,  the  National 
Emission  Ceilings  Directive  provides 
for  emission 
reductions  at  national  level  that  should  be  achieved  for 
main pollutants. 

The  emission  of  several  air  pollutants  has  decreased 
significantly  in  Latvia49.  Reductions  between  1990  and 
2014  for  sulphur  oxides  (-96%),  nitrogen  oxides  (-63%), 
ammonia  (-61%)  as  well  as  volatile  organic  compounds 
(-46%)  ensure  air  emissions  for  these  pollutants  are 

47 European Environment Agency, Attainment situation for PM10, NOx 

and O3 in 2014 [publication forthcoming] 

48 European Commission, 2016. Air Quality Standards 
49 See EIONET Central Data Repository and Air pollutant emissions data 

viewer (NEC Directive) 

50  The  current  national  emission  ceilings  apply  since  2010  (Directive 
2001/81/EC);  revised  ceilings  for  2020  and  2030  have  been  set  by 
Directive  (EU)  2016/2284  on  the  reduction  of  national  emissions  of 
certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive  2003/35/EC and 
repealing Directive 2001/81/EC. 

51  Particulate  matter  (PM)  is  a  mixture  of  aerosol  particles  (solid  and 
liquid)  covering  a  wide  range  of  sizes  and  chemical  compositions. 
PM10  (PM2.5)  refers  to  particles  with  a  diameter  of  10  (2.5) 
micrometres  or  less.  PM  is  emitted  from  many  anthropogenic 
sources, including combustion. 

52  Low  level  ozone  is  produced  by  photochemical  action  on  pollution 

and it is also a greenhouse gas 

53 NOx is emitted during fuel combustion e.g. from industrial facilities 
and  the  road  transport  sector.  NOx  is  a  group  of  gases  comprising 
nitrogen monoxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). 

54  European  Environment  Agency,  2016.  Air  Quality  in  Europe  –  2016 
Report,  (Table  10.2,  please  see  details  in  this  report  as  regards  the 
underpinning    methodology) 

55 Based on European Environment Agency, 2016. Air Quality in Europe 

– 2016 Report. (Figures 4.1, 5.1 and 6.1) 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
                                                            
 
Latvia  15 

been  only  been  registered  related  to  the  long-term 
objectives  regarding  ozone  concentration  in  two  air 
quality zones56. 

The  persistent  breaches  of  air  quality  requirements  (for 
PM10), which have severe negative effects on health and 
environment,  are  being  followed  up  by  the  European 
Commission  through  infringement  procedures  covering 
all  the  Member  States  concerned,  including  Latvia.  The 
aim  is  that  adequate  measures  are put  in place  to  bring 
all zones into compliance. 

It is estimated that the health-related external costs from 
air  pollution  in  Latvia  are  above  EUR  748  million/year 
(income  adjusted,  2010),  which 
include  not  only 
the intrinsic value of living a full health life but also direct 
costs to the economy. These direct economic costs relate 
to 325 thousand workdays lost each year due to sickness 
related  to  air  pollution,  with  associated  costs  for 
employers  of  EUR  22  million/year  (income  adjusted, 
2010),  for  healthcare  of  above  EUR  2  million/year 
(income adjusted, 2010), and for agriculture (crop losses) 
of EUR 11 million/year (2010)57. 

Suggested action 

  Reduce PM10 emission and concentration, inter alia, by 
reducing  emissions  related  to  energy  and  heat 
generation  using  solid  fuels,  to  transport  and  to 
agriculture. 

Noise 

The  Environmental  Noise  Directive  provides  for  a 
common  approach  for  the  avoidance,  prevention  and 
reduction  of  harmful  effects  due  to  exposure  to 
environmental noise. 

Excessive  noise  is  one  of  the  main  causes  of  health 
issues58.  To alleviate  this,  the  EU  acquis  sets  out  several 
requirements, 
including  assessing  the  exposure  to 
environmental  noise  through  noise  mapping,  ensuring 
that information on environmental noise and its effects is 
made  available  to  the  public,  and  adopting  action  plans 
with  a  view  to  preventing  and  reducing  environmental 
noise  where  necessary  and  to  preserving  the  acoustic 
environment quality where it is good. 

Latvia's 
implementation  of  the  Environmental  Noise 
Directive59  is  delayed.  The  noise  mapping  for  the  most 

56  See  The  EEA/Eionet  Air  Quality  Portal  and  the  related  Central  Data 

Repository 

57These figures are based on the Impact Assessment for the European 

Commission Integrated Clean Air Package (2013) 

58  WHO/JRC,  2011,  Burden  of  disease  from  environmental  noise, 
Fritschi, L., Brown, A.L., Kim, R., Schwela, D., Kephalopoulos, S. (eds), 
World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, 
Denmark 

59 The Noise Directive requires Member States to prepare and publish, 
every  5  years,  noise  maps  and  noise  management  action  plans  for 
agglomerations  with  more  than  100,000  inhabitants,  and  for  major 
roads, railways and airports.  

recent  reporting  round,  for  the  reference  year  2011,  is 
complete  for  agglomerations,  major  airports  and  major 
roads,  but  incomplete  major  railways.  Action  plans  for 
noise  management  in  the  current  period  have  been 
adopted  for  agglomerations,  major  roads  and  airports, 
but not for major railways. 

Suggested action 

  Complete  noise  mapping  and  action  plans  for  noise 

management. 

Water quality and management 

(including  surface  and  ground  waters) 

The  EU  water  policy  and  legislation  require  that  the 
impact  of  pressures  on  transitional,  coastal  and  fresh 
waters 
is 
significantly  reduced  to  achieve,  maintain  or  enhance 
good  status  of  water  bodies,  as  defined  by  the  Water 
Framework Directive; that citizens throughout the Union 
benefit from high standards for safe drinking and bathing 
water;  and  that  the  nutrient  cycle  (nitrogen  and 
phosphorus)  is  managed  in  a  more  sustainable  and 
resource-efficient way. 

SDG  6  encourages  countries  to  ensure  availability  and 
sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. 

The  main  overall  objective  of  EU  water  policy  and 
legislation  is  to  ensure  access  to  good  quality  water  in 
sufficient  quantity  for  all  Europeans.  The  EU  water 
acquis60  seeks  to  ensure  good  status  of  all  water  bodies 
across Europe by addressing pollution sources (from e.g. 
agriculture, urban areas and industrial activities), physical 
and  hydrological modifications  to  water  bodies)  and  the 
management of risks of flooding.  

(RBMPs)  are  a 
River  Basin  Management  Plans 
requirement  of  the  Water  Framework  Directive  and  a 
means  of  achieving  the  protection,  improvement  and 
sustainable use of the water environment across Europe. 
This includes surface freshwaters such as lakes and rivers, 
groundwater,  estuaries  and  coastal  waters  up  to  one 
nautical mile. 

Latvia has provided information to the Commission from 
its  second  generation  of  RBMPs.  However,  as  the 
Commission  has  not  yet  been  able  to  validate  this 
information  for  all  Member  States,  it  is  not  reported 
here. 

In  its  first  generation  of  RBMPs  Latvia  reported  53%  of 
surface water bodies and almost all groundwater bodies 
classified  as  having  good  or  high  ecological  status61  and 

60  This  includes  the  Bathing  Waters  Directive  (2006/7/EC);  the  Urban 
Waste  Water  Treatment  Directive 
(91/271/EEC)  concerning 
discharges  of  municipal  and  some  industrial  waste  waters;  the 
Drinking  Water  Directive  (98/83/EC)  concerning  potable  water 
quality;  the  Water  Framework  Directive  (2000/60/EC)  concerning 
water  resources  management;  the  Nitrates  Directive  (91/676/EEC) 
and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) 

61 Good ecological status is defined in the Water Framework Directive 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
                                                            
all  groundwater  bodies62  classified  as  having  good 
groundwater status. 

compliance  rate  with  indicator  parameters  laid  down  in 
the Drinking Water Directive64. 

Latvia  16 

The main pressures are point sources from urban (and to 
a  lesser  extent  industrial)  wastewater,  diffuse  sources 
from agriculture and hydromorphological alterations. 

There  are  certain  deficiencies  in  RBMPs.  In  particular 
the methods to assess the status of water bodies are not 
fully  developed.  A  high  number  of  exemptions  were 
applied.  The  Programmes  of  Measures  are  expected  to 
result  in  improvement  of  the  ecological  and  chemical 
status63  of  natural  surface  water  bodies  by  24%  and  5% 
respectively.  The  planned  measures  are  expected  to 
result in improvement of ecological potential of artificial 
and heavily modified water bodies by 17% and chemical 
status of these bodies by 8%. 

As shown in Figure 10, in 2015, in Latvia out of 55 bathing 
waters,  67.3%  were  of  excellent  quality,  18.2%  of  good 
quality while it was not possible to assess the remaining 
8 bathing waters as they were just recently identified and 
did not have data about 4 last bathing seasons, necessary 
for the assessment 65.   
Figure 10: Bathing water quality 2012–1566 

is  submitted 

sensitive  area,  meaning 

With  regard  to  the  implementation  of  the  Urban  Waste 
Water  Treatment  Directive,  Latvia  reaches  overall  high 
compliance  rates:  100%  of  its  waste  water  load  is 
collected,  and  98.7% 
to  secondary 
treatment67.  The final deadline to fully comply with the 
Urban  Waste  Water  Treatment  Directive  (UWWTD)  in 
Latvia  was  the  end  of  2015.  All  the  Latvian  territory  is 
considered  as 
that  all 
agglomerations whose size is above 10,000 p.e. should be 
subject to more stringent treatment. Commission's latest 
report on the implementation of the Urban Waste Water 
Treatment  Directive  indicates  that,  in  2012,  0%  of  the 
waste water load collected was subject to more stringent 
treatment  in  accordance  with  Article  5  of  the  WWTD. 
However,  Latvia  has  since  then  explained  that  this  was 
due  to  a  reporting  mistake  and  only  3  agglomerations 
remain,  overall,  non-compliant  with  the  Urban  Waste 
Water  Treatment  Directive.  Despite  these  overall  good 
results, it should be noted that 10.9% of the waste water 

64  Commission's  Synthesis  Report  on  the  Quality  of  Drinking  Water  in 
the  Union  examining  Member  States'  reports  for  the  2011-2013 
period, 
foreseen  under  Article  13(5)  of  Directive  98/83/EC; 
COM(2016)666 

65  European  Environment  Agency,  2016.  European  bathing  water 

quality in 2015, p. 26 

66 European Environment Agency, State of bathing water, 2016 
67  Eighth  Report  on  the  Implementation  Status  and  the  Programmes 
for  Implementation  (as  required  by  Article  17)  of  Council  Directive 
91/271/EEC  concerning  Urban  Waste  Water  treatment  Directive 
(COM  (2016)105  final)  and  Commission  Staff  Working  Document 
accompanying the report (SWD(2016)45 final). 

As  regards  water  pollution  from  agricultural  sources, 
nitrate levels have been slightly decreasing in the period 
2008-2011.  However,  eutrophication  of  the  Baltic  Sea 
remains  an  issue.  In  2008-2011,  a  slight  expansion  of 
the agricultural area took place and mineral fertilizer use 
increased  as  compared  to  the  period  2004-2007.  At  the 
same time, the pressure from livestock decreased, due to 
a  reduction 
in  the  number  of  animals.  Following 
an infringement procedure on the implementation of the 
nitrates  directive,  Latvia  has 
its  action 
programme measures. 

improved 

As  regards  drinking  water,  Latvia  reaches  very  high 
compliance  rates  of  99-100%  for  microbiological  and 
shows  a  98.7% 
chemical  parameters,  and  also 

referring to the quality of the biological community, the hydrological 
characteristics and the chemical characteristics. 

62  For  groundwater,  a  precautionary  approach  has  been  taken  that 
comprises  a  prohibition  on  direct  discharges  to  groundwater,  and  a 
requirement to monitor groundwater bodies. 

63  Good  chemical  status  is  defined  in  the  Water  Framework  Directive 
referring to compliance with all the quality standards established for 
chemical substances at European level. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                                                                 
 
                                                            
Latvia  17 

benchmark system in 2017.71 

The  EU  stimulates  green  cities  through  awards  and 
funding,  such  as  the  EU  Green  Capital  Award  aimed  at 
cities  with  more  than  100,000  inhabitants  and  the 
EU Green  Leaf  initiative  aimed  at  cities  and  towns,  with 
between 20,000 and 100,000 inhabitants.  

load in Latvia is addressed via individual or other systems 
whose  appropriateness  to  protect  the  environment 
might be questionable. 

Finally,  it  is  necessary  to  improve  the  situation  of  the 
physical  connections  to  the  waste  water  collection 
systems. 

The  estimated  investment  needs  (reported  by  Latvia 
under  Article  17  of  the  Urban  Waste  Water  Treatment 
Directive) to reach full compliance with the Directive are 
of EUR 107 million68. 

Suggested action 

  The  RBMP  of  Measures  should  address  all  relevant 
in  particular 

pressures  and 
measures addressing agricultural pollution. 

implementation  gaps 

  Review  and 

improve 

its  measures  to  reduce  the 

hydromorphological pressure in its river basins. 

  Measures 

to 

rationalise  water  and  wastewater 
management  structures  and  services  could  also  be 
considered  together  with  incentives  for  increasing  the 
level of physical connections to the networks. 

Enhancing the sustainability of cities  

The  EU  Policy  on  the  urban  environment  encourages 
cities  to 
implement  policies  for  sustainable  urban 
planning and design, including innovative approaches for 
urban  public 
sustainable 
buildings,  energy  efficiency  and  urban  biodiversity 
conservation.  

transport  and  mobility, 

SDG11  aims  at  making  cities  and  human  settlements 
inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. 

Europe is a Union of cities and towns; around 75% of the 
EU  population  are  living  in  urban  areas.69  The  urban 
environment  poses  particular  challenges 
the 
environment  and  human  health,  whilst  also  providing 
opportunities and efficiency gains in the use of resources.  

for 

The  Member  States,  European  institutions,  cities  and 
stakeholders have prepared a new Urban Agenda for the 
EU  (incorporating  the  Smart  Cities  initiative)  to  tackle 
these  issues  in  a  comprehensive  way,  including  their 
connections with social and economic challenges. At the 
heart  of  this  Urban  Agenda  will  be  the  development  of 
twelve  partnerships  on  the  identified  urban  challenges, 
including air quality and housing70.  

The  European  Commission  will 

launch  a  new  EU 

A  number  of  initiatives  are  covered  under  the  Union  of 
the Baltic Cities Sustainable Cities Commission, which is a 
voluntary network  of  its  member  cities  of the  Baltic  Sea 
Region  addressing  a  number  of 
including 
environmentally  sustainable  development.  This  includes 
such  initiatives  as  integrated  management  systems  and 
spatial  management,  urban  water  management, 
maritime  activities  and  sustainable  urban  mobility. 
For example,  the  project  PRESTO,  which  is  aimed  at 
improving  quality  of  local  waters  and  the  Baltic  Sea  by 
reducing nutrient load.  

issues, 

Under  the  project  PURE,  aimed  at  promote  advanced 
phosphorus removal and sustainable sludge management 
in the Baltic Sea region, phosphorus removal equipment 
was installed in Riga and Jūrmala waste water treatment 
plants. 

Furthermore, Riga City Council is amongst the partners of 
the Baltic  Urban  Lab  project,  which  aims  at  identifying 
and  promoting  best  practices  on  brown 
field 
regeneration. 
Under the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy72 
20  Latvian  cities  have  set  GHG  reduction  targets  for  a 
period  until  2020.  Valka  has  also  committed  to  develop 
municipality wide adaptation strategy and action plan. 

Riga  City  has  implemented  a  flood  management  project 

68 Latvia reports that according to a survey  carried  out by MoERDF in 
2014,  the  investment  needs  for  the  development  of  waste  water 
systems 
incl.  waste  water  treatment  plants,  extension  and 
renovation of waste water pipelines in agglomerations whose size is 
above 2,000 p.e. amounts to 445 million EUR 

69 European Environment Agency, Urban environment 
70 http://urbanagendaforthe.eu/ 

71 The Commission is developing an Urban Benchmarking and 

Monitoring ('UBaM') tool to be launched in 2017. Best practices 
emerge and these will be better disseminated via the app featuring 
the UBaM tool, and increasingly via e.g. EUROCITIES, ICLEI, CEMR, 
Committee of the Regions, Covenant of Mayors and others. 

72 Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
                                                            
Latvia  18 

"Hydro  Climate  Strategy  Riga"73  that  produced  maps, 
models  and  guidance  to  help  Riga  City  Council  plan 
measures for safeguarding the Latvian capital against the 
increased  risk  of  flooding  predicted  by  climate  change 
scenarios.  

15  municipalities  have  published  their  climate  related 
actions in the UNFCCC Non-state Actor Zone for Climate 
Action  (NAZCA),  emphasizing  their  commitment  and 
climate friendly forward-looking development. 

The  OP  Growth  and  Employment  will  provide  ESIF 
support the for revitalisation measures in the city of Riga 
transport 
and 
measures in other major Latvian cities. 

for  environmentally 

friendly  public 

International agreements  

The  EU  Treaties  require  that  the  Union  policy  on  the 
environment  promotes  measures  at  the  international 
level  to  deal  with  regional  or  worldwide  environmental 
problems. 

Most  environmental  problems  have  a  transboundary 
nature  and  often  a  global  scope  and  they  can  only  be 
addressed effectively through international co-operation. 
International  environmental  agreements  concluded  by 
the Union are binding upon the institutions of the Union 
and  on  its Member  States. This  requires  the  EU and the 
Member  States  to  sign,  ratify  and  effectively  implement 
all  relevant  multilateral  environmental  agreements 
(MEAs) in a timely manner. This will also be an important 
contribution  towards  the  achievement  of  the  SDGs, 
which Member States committed to in 2015 and include 
many  commitments  contained  already  in  legally  binding 
agreements. 

The  fact  that  some  Member  States  did  not  sign  and/or 
ratify  a  number  of  MEAs  compromises  environmental 
implementation,  including  within  the  Union,  as  well  as 
in  related  negotiations  and 
the  Union’s  credibility 
international  meetings  where 
the 
participation of third countries to such agreements is an 
established  EU  policy  objective.  In  agreements  where 
voting takes place it has a direct impact on the number of 
votes to be cast by the EU. 

supporting 

Latvia  has  signed  and  ratified  almost  all  MEAs.  It  has 
signed  but  not  yet  ratified  the  International  Convention 
for the Regulation of Whaling and the Nagoya Protocol74. 

73Hydro Climate Strategy Riga 
74 Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable 
Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on 
Biological Diversity. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
Part II: Enabling Framework: Implementation Tools 

4. Market based instruments and investment

Latvia  19 

Green  taxation  and  environmentally  harmful 
subsidies  

The Circular Economy Action Plan encourages the use of 
financial  incentives  and  economic  instruments,  such  as 
taxation  to  ensure  that  product  prices  better  reflect 
environmental costs. The phasing out of environmentally 
harmful  subsidies  is  monitored  in  the  context  of  the 
European  Semester  and  in  national  reform  programmes 
submitted by Member States. 

Taxing pollution and resource use can generate increased 
revenue  and  bring  important  social  and  environmental 
benefits. 

Environmental taxation has been strengthened but there 
is further scope for a growth-friendly tax shift.  

In 2014, the ratio of tax revenues to GDP in Latvia slightly 
exceeded  the  EU  average  (2.67%  vs  2.46%  of  GDP)75.  In 
the same year environmental tax revenues accounted for 
9.26%  of  total  revenues  from  taxes  and  social-security 
contributions  (EU28  average:  6.35%)  as  shown  in  Figure 
11.  Most  of  the  revenue  of  environmental  taxes  still 
comes from energy taxes (74% of environmental taxes in 
2014),  while  the  share  of  transport  was  18%  of  total 
environmental  taxes  in  2014.  Pollution/resource  and 
transport taxes (excluding transport fuels) have produced 
smallest revenue streams – 4%. Additional revenue from 
environment  related  taxes  could  therefore  alleviate 
budgetary  pressures  and  provide  the  necessary  source 
for funding contributing to the green economy.76  

Further  increasing  taxes  on  the  use  of  natural  resources 
and  decrease  of  environmentally  harmful  subsidies 
would  contribute  to  achieving  environmental  goals; 
improve  resource  and  energy  efficiency  that  would  lead 
to  higher  levels  of  output  and  employment  at  the  same 
time  providing  room  for  a  shift  away  from  taxation  of 
labour. 

A  2016  study  shows  there  is  considerable  potential  for 
shifting  taxes  from  labour  to  environment77.  Under  a 

75 Eurostat, Environmental tax revenues, accessed June 2016 
76  Taxation  trends  in  the  EU  (Eurostat,  2014);  Tax  Reforms  in  EU 

Member States 2014 (TAXUD) 

77  Eunomia  Research  and  Consulting,  IEEP,  Aarhus  University,  ENT, 
2016.  Study on Assessing the Environmental Fiscal Reform Potential 
for the EU28. N.B. National governments are responsible for setting 
tax  rates  within  the  EU  Single  Market  rules  and  this  report  is  not 
suggesting  concrete  changes  as  to  the  level  of  environmental 
taxation.  It  merely  presents  the  findings  of  the  2016  study  by 
Eunomia et al on the potential benefits various environmental taxes 
could bring. It is then for the national authorities to assess this study 

good  practice  scenario78,  these  taxes  could  generate  an 
additional  EUR  0.22  billion  by  2018,  rising  to  EUR  0.43 
is 
billion  by  2030  (both 
equivalent to an increase by 0.79% and 1.05% of GDP in 
2018 and 2030, respectively.  

in  real  2015  terms).  This 

Figure  11:  Environmental  tax  revenues  as  a  share  of 
total  revenues  from  taxes  and  social  contributions  
(excluding imputed social contributions) in 201479 

In  Latvia,  the  Natural  resource  tax  since  its  introduction 
in  2006  has  increased  from  0.6  EUR  per  CO2  tonne  to 
3.50  EUR  per  CO2  tonne  in  2015.  Possibilities  of  the 
increase  of  the  Natural  resources  tax  (NRT)  rate  per 
tonne  of  CO2  are  being  evaluated  and  to  promote 
implementation  of  greenhouse  gas  emission  reduction 
measures further raise of the CO2 rates is feasible in the 
near  future.  However,  it  is  to  be  done  in  the  context  of 
the processes taking place in the EU allowances market. 

and their concrete impacts in the national context. A first step in this 
respect,  already  done  by  a  number  of  Member  States,  is  to  set  up 
expert groups to assess these and make specific proposals. 
78 The good practice scenario means benchmarking to a successful 

taxation practice in another Member State. 

79 Eurostat, Environmental tax revenues, accessed October 2016 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
 
                                                                                                 
NRT  for  waste  landfill  has  increased  from  1.07  EUR  per 
tonne in 2002 to 12.00 EUR per tonne in 2014. Since the 
NRT  rate  has  not  been  effective  enough  for  diverting 
waste  from  landfill  to  recycling,  Latvia  has  plans  for 
further increase in NRT rate for waste landfill.  

Green Public Procurement  

The  EU  green  public  procurement  policies  encourage 
Member States to take further steps to reach the target 
of applying green procurement criteria to at least 50% of 
public tenders. 
Green  Public  Procurement  (GPP)  is  a  process  whereby 
public  authorities  seek  to  procure  goods,  services  and 
works  with  a  reduced  environmental  impact  throughout 
their  life-cycle  when  compared  to  goods,  services  and 
works  with  the  same  primary  function  that  would 
otherwise be procured.  

this  money 

The  purchasing  power  of  public  procurement  in  the  EU 
equals to approximately 14% of GDP80. A substantial part 
of 
is  spent  on  sectors  with  high 
environmental impact such as construction or transport, 
so  GPP  can  help  to  significantly  lower  the  impact  of 
public  spending  and 
innovative 
businesses.  The  Commission  has  proposed  EU  GPP 
criteria81. 

foster  sustainable 

is 

(GPP) 

included 

In  Latvia,  a  national  strategy  on  Green  Public 
Procurement 
“Green 
Procurement support plan for 2015 – 2017”82, which was 
elaborated  by  the  Ministry  of  Environmental  Protection 
and  Regional  Development 
cooperation  with 
stakeholders. The plan has been approved by the Cabinet 
of Ministers on 17th of February 2015.83 

the 

in 

in 

GPP  criteria  have  been  developed  at  the  national  level 
through  this  plan  for  21  products.  In  addition  to  the 
product  groups,  the  GPP  Support  Plan  for  2015-2017 
defines  the  GPP  targets  of  15%  for  2015,  20%  for  2016, 
and  30%  for  2017  to  be  met  each  year  for  national  and 
local authorities.84  

Green  procurement  support  plan  2015-2017  is  intended 
to ensure that procurement planned from the state and 
local government budgets to which GP applies in financial 
terms  reaches  at  least  15%  of  the  total  volume  of 
procurement  made  by  state  and 
local  government 
institutions starting from 2015, 20% in 2016, and 30% in 

Latvia  20 

2017, and that GP and “Green Procurement support plan 
2015-2017”  requirements  are  applied  and  integrated  in 
the  implementation  process  of  the  EU  Structural  Funds 
and of the Cohesion Fund.85 

There is no data available as regards the uptake of GPP. 

Investments: the contribution of EU funds  

European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  Regulations 
provide  that  Member  States  promote  environment  and 
funding  strategies  and 
climate  objectives 
programmes 
territorial 
cohesion,  rural  development  and  maritime  policy,  and 
reinforce the capacity of implementing bodies to deliver 
cost-effective and sustainable investments in these areas. 

in  their 
for  economic, 

social  and 

Making  good  use  of  the  European  Structural  and 
Investment  Funds  (ESIF)86  is  essential  to  achieve  the 
environmental goals and integrate these into other policy 
areas.  Other  instruments  such  as  the  Horizon  2020,  the 
LIFE  programme  and  the  EFSI87  may  also  support 
implementation and spread of best practice. 

Latvia, through 3 national programmes, benefits the ESIF 
funding of EUR 5.6 billion over the period 2014-202088.  

The biggest share – EUR 2.4 billion (42.6%) of funding is 
coming 
for  Regional 
the  European  Fund 
Development (ERDF). 

from 

EUR 1.3 billion (24%) - from the Cohesion Fund (CF). 

EUR 1.1 billion (19.1%) – from the European Agricultural 
Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). 

EUR 639 million (11.3%) - from the European Social Fund 
(ESF). 

EUR 140 million (2.5%) from the European Maritime and 
Fisheries  Fund  (EMFF)  in  intensification  of  aquaculture 
(43%  of  pond  fish  farming  activities  located  in  Natura 
2000 areas). 

In  total,  EUR  783  million  are  dedicated  to  the  Thematic 
objective  (TO)6  Environment  Protection  and  Resource 
efficiency,  EUR  368  though  the  ERDF,  EUR  190  million 
through  the  CF,  EUR    202  million  through  the  EAFRD 
programme,  EUR  190  million  through  the  CF,    EUR  24.4 
million through the EMFF. In addition, EUR 520 million is 
foreseen  for  TO4  Low  Carbon  Economy  (ERDF,  CF  and 
EAFRD)  and  EUR  268  million  for  TO5  Climate  Change 

80 European Commission, 2015. Public procurement 
81 In the Communication “Public procurement for a better 

environment” (COM /2008/400) the Commission recommended the 
creation of a process for setting common GPP criteria. The basic 
concept of GPP relies on having clear, verifiable, justifiable and 
ambitious environmental criteria for products and services, based on 
a life-cycle approach and scientific evidence base. 
82 Green Procurement support plan for 2015 – 2017 
83  European  Commission,  2015.  Documentation  on  National  GPP 

85  European  Commission,  2015.  Documentation  on  National  GPP 

Action Plans 

86  ESIF  comprises  five  funds  –  the  European  Regional  Development 
Funds  (ERDF),  the  Cohesion  Fund  (CF),  the  European  Social  Fund 
(ESF),  the  European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development 
(EAFRD), and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). The 
ERDF, the CF and the ESF together form the Cohesion Policy funds. 
87  European  Investment  Bank,  2016  European  Fund  for  Strategic 

Action Plans 

Investments 

84PwC,  2015.  Final  report  Strategic  use  of  public  procurement  in 

88  European  Commission:  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds 

promoting green, social and innovative policies 

Country Data for Latvia 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
                                                            
Adoption  and  Risk  Prevention  (EAFRD  and  ERDF)  (see 
Figure 12).  

Figure  12:  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds 
2014-2020: Budget Latvia by theme, EUR billion89 

Latvia  21 

With regard to the integration of environmental concerns 
into  the  Common  Agricultural  Policy  (CAP),  the  two  key 
areas for Latvia (as for all Member States) are, first, using 
Rural  Development  funds  to  pay  for  environmental  land 
management  and  other  environmental  measures,  while 
avoiding  financing  measures  which  could  damage  the 
environment;  and  secondly,  ensuring  an  effective 
implementation of the first pillar of the CAP with regard 
to  cross  compliance  and  1st  pillar  'greening'.  30%  of 
direct payment envelope (out of total EUR 1.45 billion for 
2015-202090) is allocated to greening practices beneficial 
for  the  environment.  An  environmentally  ambitious 
implementation  of 1st  pillar greening  would  clearly help 
to  improve  the  environmental  situation  in  areas  not 
covered by rural development, including intensive areas, 
and if appropriate Latvia could review its implementation 
of the sectorial policy. 

It is too early to draw conclusions as regards the use and 
results  of  ESIF  funds  for  the  period  2014-2020,  as  the 
relevant  operational  programmes  are  still  in  an  early 
stage of their implementation.  

Current data suggest that the EU funds for the 2007-2013 
period were almost fully spent.    

The National Rural Development Program (RDP) of Latvia, 
its EARDF part, amounts to around EUR 1.1 billion (after 
the 1st modification).  

agri-environmental-climate  measure 
Budget 
for 
represents  7.05%  of 
total  EAFRD  budget. 
the 
The measure on natural constraints takes up 18.9% of the 
total  EAFRD  (and  does  not  need  to  present  its  link  to 
biodiversity  conservation).  Around  1.5%  is  allocated  to 
measure  on  compensation  of  the  restrictions  posed  by 
Natura 2000. 

In  the  currently  proposed  modification  the  sub-measure 
on high-nature value grassland plans to incorporate some 
elements  from  the  successful  LIFE  project,  which  is 
appreciated. 

89  European  Commission,  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds 

Data By Country 

90 Commission delegated regulation (EU) 2015/851) 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
                                                            
5. Effective governance and knowledge

Latvia  22 

SDG  16  aims  at  providing  access  to  justice  and  building 
effective,  accountable  and  inclusive  institutions  at  all 
levels. SDG 17 aims at better implementation, improving 
policy  coordination  and  policy  coherence,  stimulating 
science, 
innovation,  establishing 
partnerships and developing measurements of progress. 

technology 

and 

Effective governance of EU environmental legislation and 
policies  requires  having  an  appropriate 
institutional 
framework,  policy  coherence  and  coordination,  applying 
legal  and  non-legal  instruments,  engaging  with  non-
governmental  stakeholders,  and  having  adequate  levels 
of  knowledge  and  skills91.  Successful  implementation 
depends, to a large extent, on central, regional and local 
government  fulfilling  key  legislative  and  administrative 
tasks,  notably  adoption  of 
implementing 
legislation,  co-ordinated  action  to  meet  environmental 
objectives  and  correct  decision-making  on  matters  such 
as  industrial  permits.  Beyond  fulfilment  of  these  tasks, 
government  must 
to  ensure  day-to-day 
compliance  by  economic  operators,  utilities  and 
individuals  ("compliance  assurance").  Civil  society  also 
has  a  role  to  play,  including  through  legal  action.  To 
underpin the roles of all actors, it is crucial to collect and 
share  knowledge  and  evidence  on  the  state  of  the 
environment  and  on  environmental  pressures,  drivers 
and impacts. 

intervene 

sound 

Equally,  effective  governance  of  EU  environmental 
legislation  and  policies  benefits  from  a  dialogue  within 
Member  States  and  between  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  on  whether  the  current  EU  environmental 
legislation  is  fit  for  purpose.  Legislation  can  only  be 
properly 
into  account 
experiences  at  Member  State  level  with  putting  EU 
commitments  into  effect.  The  Make  it  Work  initiative,  a 
Member  State  driven  project,  established 
in  2014, 
organizes a discussion on how the clarity, coherence and 
structure  of  EU  environmental 
legislation  can  be 
improved without lowering existing protection standards. 

implemented  when 

it  takes 

Effective  governance  within  central,  regional 
and local government 

Those  involved  in  implementing  environment  legislation 
at  Union,  national,  regional  and  local  levels  need  to  be 
equipped  with  the  knowledge,  tools  and  capacity  to 
improve  the  delivery  of  benefits  from  that  legislation, 
and the governance of the enforcement process. 

Capacity to implement rules 
In  the  Programming  Period  2014-2020  an  investment  of 

is  foreseen 
capacity  of  public 

in  promoting  Latvian  
EUR  18  million 
institutions  and 
institutional 
stakeholders  and  an  efficient  public  administration, 
particularly, 
in  professional  development  of  public 
administration for development of better legal regulation 
in  the  fields  of  support  to  small  and  medium-sized 
enterprises, anti-corruption and mitigation of the shadow 
economy,  as  well  as  in  improving  the  competence  of 
the staff  of  courts  and  law  enforcement  authorities 
promote improvement of business environment.92 

In  2011,  as  part  of  a  reform  programme  put  in  place  to 
recover  from  the  financial  crisis  the  Latvian  Ministry  of 
the  Environment  merged  with  the  Ministry  of  Regional 
Development  and  Local  Government.  This  merger  also 
resulted  in  financial  cuts  (at  around  19%).  It  is  essential 
that  sufficient  capacity  and  funds  for  the  successful 
implementation  of  environmental  legislation  as  well  as 
the  achievement  of  environmental  objectives  are 
retained.  

Latvia aims to transpose new directives into the national 
legislation  respecting  the  established  timelines  and  the 
number  of  non-communication  cases  opened  for  non-
communication  of  national  legislation  transposing  new 
directives are low. 

Latvia has a low number of complaints. Cases often focus 
on  transposition  of  EU  law  into  national  law  and  these 
are resolved quickly. 

Coordination and integration 
In  2010  Latvia  adopted  its  Sustainable  Development 
Strategy until 203093. 

is 

carried  out  by 
Implementation 
administrations  and  agencies,  among 
Environment 
Service 
licensing),  Nature  Conservation  Agency 

(compliance 

subordinate 
those  State 
enforcement, 
(competent 

91  The  Commission  has  work  ongoing  to  improve  the  country-specific 
knowledge  about  quality  and  functioning  of  the  administrative 
systems of Member States. 

92 Latvian Operational Programme " Operational programme 
“Growth and Employment” for 2014-2020 
93 Sustainable Development Strategy for Latvia until 2030 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
 
                                                            
nature  conservation  authority),  Latvian  Environmental, 
Geological  and  Meteorological  Agency  (management  of 
databases,  environmental  monitoring),  Environment 
State  Bureau  (impact  assessment,  EMAS,  licensing)  and 
the  Latvian  Institute  of  Aquatic  Ecology  (monitoring  of 
aquatic  ecology),  State  Regional  Development  Agency 
(structural  funds).  The  2009  public  sector  structural 
reforms had a considerable impact on the environmental 
authorities.  In  comparison  to  2007,  they  operate  with 
significant  staff  and  financial  cuts  that  inevitably  have 
implications  on  their  monitoring,  implementation  and 
enforcement capacities. 

to  avoid  overlaps 

The  Commission  encourages  the  streamlining  of  the 
environmental  assessments 
in 
environmental  assessments  and  accelerate  decision-
making,  without  compromising  the  quality  of  the 
environmental  assessment  procedure.  The  Commission 
has issued a guidance document in 201694 regarding the 
setting  up  of  coordinated  and/or  joint  procedures  that 
are simultaneously subject to assessments under the EIA 
Directive, Habitats Directive, Water Framework Directive, 
and the Industrial Emissions Directive. 

Compliance assurance 

EU  law  generally  and  specific  provisions  on  inspections, 
other  checks,  penalties  and  environmental  liability  help 
lay  the  basis  for  the  systems  Member  States  need  to 
have 
secure  compliance  with  EU 
to 
environmental rules. 

in  place 

Public  authorities  help  ensure  accountability  of  duty-
holders by monitoring and promoting compliance and by 
taking credible follow-up action (i.e. enforcement) when 
breaches occur or liabilities arise. Compliance monitoring 
can  be  done  both  on  the 
initiative  of  authorities 
themselves  and  in  response to  citizen complaints. It  can 
involve  using  various  kinds  of  checks, 
including 
inspections  for  permitted  activities,  surveillance  for 
possible  illegal  activities,  investigations  for  crimes  and 
audits for systemic weaknesses. Similarly, there is a range 
of  means  to  promote  compliance,  including  awareness-
raising  campaigns  and  use  of  guidance  documents  and 
online  information  tools.  Follow-up  to  breaches  and 
liabilities 
action 
(e.g. withdrawal  of  a  permit),  use  of  criminal  law95  and 
action under liability law (e.g. required remediation after 
damage  from  an  accident  using 
liability  rules)  and 
contractual  law  (e.g.  measures  to  require  compliance 
with  nature  conservation  contracts).  Taken  together,  all 

administrative 

include 

can 

94  European  Commission,  2016.  Commission  notice  —  Commission 
guidance  document  on  streamlining  environmental  assessments 
conducted  under  Article  2(3)  of 
Impact 
Assessment  Directive  (Directive  2011/92/EU  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU). 
95Directive 2008/99/EC of The European Parliament and of the Council 
of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through 
criminal law.  

the  Environmental 

Latvia  23 

of these interventions represent "compliance assurance" 
as shown in Figure 13.  

Best  practice  has  moved  towards  a  risk-based  approach 
at strategic and operational levels in which the  best mix 
of compliance monitoring, promotion and enforcement is 
directed at the most serious problems. Best practice also 
recognises  the  need  for  coordination  and  cooperation 
between  different  authorities  to  ensure  consistency, 
avoid  duplication  of  work  and  reduce  administrative 
burden. Active participation in established pan-European 
networks  of  inspectors,  police,  prosecutors  and  judges, 
such as IMPEL96, EUFJE97, ENPE98 and EnviCrimeNet99, is a 
valuable tool for sharing experience and good practices. 

Figure 13: Environmental compliance assurance 

Currently, there exist a number of sectoral obligations on 
inspections  and  the  EU  directive  on  environmental 
liability  (ELD)  100  provides  a  means  of  ensuring  that  the 
"polluter-pays  principle" 
is  applied  when  there  are 
accidents  and  incidents  that  harm  the  environment. 
There 
information  giving 
insights  into  existing  strengths  and  weaknesses  in  each 
Member State.  

is  also  publically  available 

For  each  Member  State,  the  following  were  therefore 
reviewed:  use  of  risk-based  compliance  assurance; 
coordination  and  co-operation  between  authorities  and 
participation in pan-European networks; and key aspects 
of implementation of the ELD based on the Commission's 
recently  published  implementation  report  and  REFIT 
evaluation101.  

Latvia  has  developed  some  risk  assessment  tools  for 

96 European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement 

of Environmental Law 

97 European Union Forum of judges for the environment  
98 The European Network of Prosecutors for the Environment  
99 EnviCrimeNet  
100 European Union, Environmental Liability Directive 2004/35/CE 
101  COM(2016)204  final  and  COM(2016)121  final  of  14.4.2016.  This 
highlighted the need for better evidence on how the directive is used 
in practice; for tools to support its implementation, such as guidance, 
training and ELD registers; and for financial security to be available in 
case events or incidents generate remediation costs. 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
 
                                                            
inspections  of  industrial  installations.  Challenges  have 
included  budget  constraints  that  have  led  to  a  decrease 
in the staff of inspection authorities by about 40%102. 

effective system of financial security for environmental 
liabilities  (so  that  operators  not  only  have  insurance 
cover available to them but actually take it up).  

Latvia  24 

Up-to-date  information  is  lacking  in  relation  to  the 
following: 

  data-collection  arrangements  to  track  the  use  and 
effectiveness  of  different  compliance  assurance 
interventions103; 
the extent to which risk-based methods are used to 
direct  compliance  assurance  at  the  strategic  level 
and 
in  relation  to  critical  activities  outside  of 
industrial installations104,  

 

  how  the  Latvian  authorities  ensure  a  targeted  and 
proportionate  response  to  different  types  of  non-
compliant behaviour105.  

In 2011, Latvia hosted an IMPEL IRI but is otherwise not 
very  active  within 
level 
environmental enforcement networks.  

IMPEL  and  the  other  EU 

For  the  period  between  2007  and  2013,  Latvia  reported 
instances  of 
thirteen  confirmed  and  three  pending 
environmental  damage  which  were  treated  under  the 
Environmental Liability Directive. Evidence points to good 
cooperation  between  the  competent  authorities  and 
stakeholders  and  NGOs.  Latvia  has  not  established 
mandatory  financial  security  (to  pay  for  remediation 
costs if an operator cannot) and does not intend to do so. 
However, it is not evident that the market is offering such 
security or that there is any take-up.  

Suggested action 

  Improve transparency on organisation and functioning 
of compliance assurance system and on how significant 
risks are addressed, as outlined above. 

greater  participation  of 
competent 
in  the  activities  of  ENPE,  EUFJE  and 

  Encourage 
authorities 
EnviCrimeNet.  
  Step  up  efforts 

in  the 

implementation  of  the 
Environmental  Liability  Directive  (ELD)  with  proactive 
initiatives,  in  particular  by  drafting  national  guidance. 
It should  moreover  take  further  steps  to  ensure  an 

102  Impact  Assessment  study 

into  possible  options  for  revising 
recommendation  2001/331/EC  providing  for  minimum  criteria  for 
environmental inspections (RMCEI), p. 48; IMPEL IRI Latvia, p. 32 and 
47.  

103  The  Latvian  State  Environmental  Service  publishes  online  monthly 
reports  with  some  basic  statistical  data  on  industrial  inspections. 
These include data on numbers of inspections carried-out per region, 
per inspector and per category of installation. See IMPEL IRI Latvia, p. 
38-39. 

104  According  to  the  IMPEL  IRI,  the  risk-based  approach  and  related 
data collection for industrial installations do not seem to be applied 
to  the  same  extent  for  inspections  in  other  environmental  policy 
areas, see p. 27-29 and 44 

105  A  national  inspector's  manual  and  some  guidance  are  in  place 
which  however  do  not  cover  important  compliance  assurance 
elements, such as for instance criteria for determination of sanctions 
level, see IMPEL IRI Latvia, p. 31-33. 

Public participation and access to justice 

The  Aarhus  Convention,  related  EU  legislation  on  public 
participation and environmental impact assessment, and 
the case-law of the Court of Justice require that citizens 
and  their  associations  should  be  able  to  participate  in 
decision-making  on  projects  and  plans  and  should  enjoy 
effective environmental access to justice. 

Citizens  can  more  effectively  protect  the  environment  if 
they can rely on the three "pillars" of the Convention on 
Access  to  Information,  Public  Participation  in  Decision-
making  and  Access  to  Justice  in  Environmental  Matters 
("the  Aarhus  Convention").  Public  participation 
in 
is  an 
the administrative  decision  making  process 
important element to ensure that the authority takes its 
decision  on  the  best  possible  basis.  The  Commission 
intends  to  examine  compliance  with  mandatory  public 
participation requirements more systematically at a later 
stage. 

Access  to  justice  in  environmental  matters  is  a  set  of 
guarantees  that  allows  citizens  and  their  associations  to 
challenge  acts  or  omissions  of  the  public  administration 
before  a  court. 
for  decentralised 
It 
implementation of EU environmental law. 

is  a 

tool 

For  each  Member  State,  two  crucial  elements  for 
effective  access  to  justice  have  been  systematically 
reviewed:  the  legal  standing  for  the  public,  including 
NGOs and the extent to which prohibitive costs represent 
a barrier. 

Latvia grants the public, notably individuals and NGOs, a 
very broad access to justice in environmental cases (actio 
popularis).  The  costs  for  bringing  a  case  to  a  court  are 
also  not  considered  as  being  prohibitively  high. 
This guarantees that members of the public are provided 
with  good  conditions  for  asking  for  a  judicial  review  in 
environmental matters.  However, the court procedures, 
in  Latvia  are  rather 
including  environmental  cases, 
long106.  

Access 
evidence 

to 

information,  knowledge  and 

The  Aarhus  Convention  and  related  EU  legislation  on 
access  to  information  and  the  sharing  of  spatial  data 
require that the public has access to clear information on 
the environment, including on how Union environmental 
law is being implemented. 

It is of crucial importance to public authorities, the public 
and business that environmental information is shared in 

106  European  Commission,  2012/2013  access 

to 

justice 

in 

environmental matters  

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia 

 
                                                            
                                                            
Latvia  25 

the 

needed 

evaluation 

the  INSPIRE  geoportal114    indicate  that  not  all  spatial 
information 
and 
for 
implementation of EU environmental law has been made 
available  or  is  accessible.  The  larger  part  of  this  missing 
spatial  information  consists  of  the  environmental  data 
required  to  be  made  available  under  the  existing 
reporting 
EU 
environmental law. 

and  monitoring 

regulations 

of 

Suggested action 

  Identify and document all spatial data sets required for 
the  implementation  of  environmental  law,  and  make 
the data  and  documentation  at  least  accessible  'as  is' 
to  other  public  authorities  and  the  public  through  the 
digital services foreseen in the INSPIRE Directive. 

authorities 

public 
the  public, 

and 
increasingly 

an  efficient  and  effective  way.  This  covers  reporting  by 
active 
and 
businesses 
dissemination 
through 
to 
electronic means. 
The  Aarhus  Convention107,  the  Access  to  Environmental 
Information  Directive108  and  the  INSPIRE  Directive109 
together  create  a  legal  foundation  for  the  sharing  of 
environmental  information  between  public  authorities 
and with the public. They also represent the green part of 
the  ongoing  EU  e-Government  Action  Plan110.  The  first 
two 
to  provide 
information  to  the  public,  both  on  request  and  actively. 
The  INSPIRE  Directive  is  a  pioneering  instrument  for 
electronic  data-sharing  between  public  authorities  who 
can  vary  in  their  data-sharing  policies,  e.g.  on  whether 
access to data is for free. The INSPIRE Directive sets up a 
geoportal which indicates the level of shared spatial data 
in  each  Member  State  –  i.e.  data  related  to  specific 
locations,  such  as  air  quality  monitoring  data.  Amongst 
other  benefits 
it  facilitates  the  public  authorities' 
reporting obligations.  

create  obligations 

instruments 

For  each  Member 
accessibility  of 
State, 
environmental data (based on what the INSPIRE Directive 
envisages)  as  well  as  data-sharing  policies  ('open  data') 
have been systematically reviewed111.  

the 

INSPIRE 

implementation  report112 

Latvia's  performance  on  the  implementation  of  the 
INSPIRE  Directive  as  enabling  framework  to  actively 
disseminate  environmental  information  to  the  public 
leaves  room  for  improvement.  Latvia  has  indicated  in 
the 3-yearly 
  that 
the necessary  data-sharing  policies  allowing  access  and 
use  of  spatial  data  by  national  administrations,  other 
Member  States'  administrations  and  EU 
institutions 
without  procedural  obstacles  are  available  and 
implemented.  Data-sharing  in  Latvia  is  implemented 
through  global  or  bilateral  cooperation  agreements 
between  public  authorities.  The  cooperation  model  in 
place is not specific to spatial information, but is used for 
all  kind  of  information.  The  licences  used  for  spatial 
information are standardized.    
Assessments  of  monitoring  reports113    issued  by  Latvia 
and the spatial information that Latvia has published on 

107  UNECE,  1998.  Convention  on  Access  to  Information,  Public 
in 
in  Decision-Making  and  Access 

Justice 

to 

Participation 
Environmental Matters 

108  European  Union,  Directive  2003/4/EC  on  public  access  to 

environmental information 

109 European Union, INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC  
110  European  Union,  EU  eGovernment  Action  Plan  2016-2020  - 
Accelerating  the  digital  transformation  of  government  COM(2016) 
179 final 

111   Upon request by the Commission, most Member States provided 
an  INSPIRE  Action  Plan  addressing  implementation  issues.  These 
plans are currently being assessed by the Commission. 

112 European Commission, INSPIRE reports 
113 Inspire indicator trends  

114 Inspire Resources Summary Report 

Environmental Implementation Report – Latvia