REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Actions to Streamline Environmental Reporting
Date: 2017-06-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU environmental policy, European Environment Agency, access to information, application of EU law, dissemination of EU information, environmental monitoring, environmental protection, exchange of information, report

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 9.6.2017  COM(2017) 312 final   REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Actions to Streamline Environmental Reporting {SWD(2017) 230 final}  
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 

We all want to know if the air we breathe and the water we drink  are healthy or if our 
beaches and lakes are clean. The European public has a right to know about the quality of 
the local natural environment and whether EU actions deliver improvements. 

Knowing  this  means  managing  information  flows.  Information  at  the  European  level 
usually  starts  locally:  environmental  monitoring  of  air  pollution,  the  state  of  nature, 
water  quality,  etc.  is  all  about  seeing  what  is  happening  to  the  environment  ‘on  the 
ground.’ Some of this information is then reported to the EU level and to the public. At 
European  level  it  is  used  for  regulatory  monitoring  to  check  if  the  regulation  is 
effectively meeting its objectives.  

Some  environmental  reports  are  very  popular.  The  annual  EU  bathing  water  report 
attracts  attention  from  around  Europe,  with  the  online  information  provided  by  the 
European Environment Agency (EEA) accessed over 73 000 times in 2016. Some other 
reports  published  by the  Commission  remain  largely  unnoticed  by  the  wider  public yet 
fulfil an important purpose for regulatory monitoring of the application of EU law. 

Reporting  on  policies  and  the  environment  provides  essential  facts  and  information  for 
informed decision-making. Indeed, reporting is key to the cycle of analysis, dialogue and 
collaboration that takes place for the environment implementation review1.  

But reporting leads to costs for Member States and businesses so there is an equilibrium 
that  needs  to  be  managed  between  the  demand  for  better  information  and  the  cost  of 
providing  it.  That  is  why  the  May  2015  better  regulation  package2  launched  a  broad 
review of reporting requirements, including for the environment, in the form of a fitness 
check focused on reporting and regulatory monitoring3.  

This  Report  presents  the  resulting  action  plan  to  ensure  that  EU  environmental  law  is 
delivering  its  intended  effects  on  the  ground.  The  purpose  is  to  better  inform  the 
European  public  about  these  achievements  and  at  the  same  time  simplify  the  reporting 
burden for national administrations and businesses.  

2.  FINDINGS OF THE FITNESS CHECK 

The challenge of this fitness check was to balance two aspects. On the one hand, it meant 
stepping  back  to  see  the  bigger  picture  and  learning  across  reporting  streams.  On  the 
other hand, it was an exercise in looking at the details of the different reporting streams 
and the operational challenges they pose and learning from this. Whilst the aim was to be 
as ambitious as possible, it was also crucial to make it manageable. Key issues of scope 
were as follows: 

‘Better regulation for better results — An EU agenda (COM(2015) 215) 

1   COM(2017) 63 
2  
3   This review does not include reporting in the field of climate change. Indeed, in the climate and energy 
policy  areas,,  the  Commission  has  already  proposed  a  simplification  of  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring obligations: see "Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 
on  the  Governance  of  the  Energy  Union"  COM(2016)  759.  More  generally,  links  between 
environmental  reporting and reporting in other areas (energy, climate, agriculture, maritime etc.) are 
considered under coherence below.  

2 

 
                                                 
  'Reporting  obligations'  means  the  legal  provisions  requiring  data,  information  or 
reports to be submitted to the Commission or the EEA. This reporting was mainly to 
enable the Commission  to  monitor  the  application  of  EU  law  in  the  Member  States. 
Thus,  the  fitness  check  covers  what  is  termed  ‘regulatory  monitoring’  but  not 
environmental monitoring ‘on the ground’ in the widest sense. 

  In addition to looking at reporting to the EU level, the fitness check also considered 

how this information is disseminated afterwards. 

  Not  all  reporting  obligations  examined  in  the  fitness  check  are  directly  covered  in 
directives or regulations. Many are specified through delegated or implementing acts 
or through guidelines or informal agreements. 

Twenty  evaluation  questions  were  posed,  essentially  asking  if  the  right  information  is 
being made available at the right time, in the right way and at as low a cost as possible. 
Interested groups were consulted online and through regular workshops. Environmental 
policy has 181 reporting obligations found in 58 pieces of EU environmental legislation. 
They  require  numerical  and  geospatial  information  but  most  are  in  text  format  —  the 
hardest to report, structure and analyse. Frequency varies. Around half are every two or 
more  years,  and  around  half  lead  to  a  Commission  report  to  the  other  EU  institutions. 
Processes also vary but seem to work best when the EEA processes the data. In summary, 
the evaluation found that: 

  Effectiveness has improved significantly over the years and is considered satisfactory 
overall.  Nevertheless,  there  is  room  for  improvement  for  some  cross-cutting  issues 
(such  as  streamlining  for  a  more  common  process)  and  for  specific  pieces  of 
legislation. 

  Reporting is largely efficient and the administrative burden (estimated cost of EUR 22 
million  annually)  is  moderate,  justified  and  proportionate.  The  benefits,  such  as 
improved  and  more  targeted  implementation  and  better  public  information,  greatly 
outweigh  the  costs.  Some  efficiency  gains  could  be  delivered  by  streamlining  the 
process  in  a  more  horizontal  and  strategic  manner.  Some  adjustments  in  content, 
timing, frequency and process could also lead to efficiency gains, but some of these 
changes would require amendment of the legislation concerned. 

  Coherence  is  achieved  to  a  large  extent  between  the  reporting  obligations  in  EU 
policy  areas  like  agriculture,  climate,  energy,  marine  policy  etc.  But  it  is  worth 
considering whether the coherence between some of these different areas, as well as 
with obligations stemming from international commitments could be improved. 

  Most  reporting  obligations  are  relevant,  but  there  is  room  for  improvement  (e.g. 
advanced  technical  solutions)  and  alternative  approaches  (e.g.  harvesting  of  national 
data). In particular, the content of environmental reporting could be focused more on 
information  that  is  strategic,  quantitative  and  better  regulation-driven  (e.g.  by  using 
key  indicators).  This  would  reduce  the  amount  of  textual  information  currently 
requested. 

  There is EU added value, because current reporting delivers clear benefits in the form 
of  comparable  and  consistent  information  not  available  at  national  level.  However, 
alternative  approaches  such  as  active  dissemination  of  relevant  environmental 
information at national level may in the long run make reporting to the EU level less 
necessary. 

3 

 
Table 1: Overview of findings (for more details, see SWD(2017) 230). The percentage is 
related either  to  the 58 pieces of  legislation  or the 181 reporting obligations analysed, 
depending on the available data. 

Issue  

Percentage  

Amendment  of  legislation  already  proposed  by  the  Commission  which 
streamlines reporting (linked to legislation) 

Reporting issues were identified which may require legislative amendments 
(linked to legislation) 

Reporting which includes best practice examples 
(linked to legislation) 
Reporting which is considered of high usefulness  
(linked to reporting obligations) 

Reporting which is considered of low usefulness  
(linked to reporting obligations) 

Reporting where the use of indicators could be improved 
(linked to legislation, based on screening analysis) 
Reporting which relies mainly on textual information 
(linked to reporting obligations) 
Reporting where external coherence could be improved 
(linked to legislation, based on stakeholder feedback) 
Reporting where the delays are significant 
(linked to 78 reporting obligations which are linked to Commission reports) 

16 % 

12 % 

19 % 

39 % 

9 % 

86 % 

76 % 

29 % 

27 % 

The evidence leads to the conclusion that most reporting obligations are largely fit-for-
purpose. Moreover, solid progress has also been made in the recent past in  many areas 
(see section 3). 

Problems that need to be tackled further include to: 

  ensure  that  all  reporting  obligations  include  the  key  indicators  needed  to  assess 

compliance and understand performance in delivering objectives; 

 

reduce  textual  reporting  requirements  and  promote  good  IT  practices  such  as 
common open source standards; 

  promote good practices for active dissemination; 

 

further  align  timing  and  frequency  for  reporting  obligations  to  correspond  to  major 
policy cycle needs; 

  harmonise  and  centralise  (some)  aspects  of  processes  to  make  them  more  effective 

and efficient; and 

  make better use of data from EU sources (such as Copernicus4) or directly from the 

public (e.g. in the context of citizen science5). 

4   www.copernicus.eu  

4 

 
 
                                                 
Overall,  modernising  and  streamlining  is  possible  through  applying  best  practice  more 
consistently  as  part  of  a  more  common  approach.  Doing  so  would  strengthen  the 
evidence  base  for  environmental  policy  and  also  make  the  process  simpler  and  more 
reliable. 

3.  MAKING PROGRESS  

The  Commission  has  long  been  working  with  the  Member  States  to  streamline 
environmental reporting6. Most recently, the Commission already set in motion a number 
of  changes,  partially  inspired  by  this  fitness  check.  These  include  the  changes  in  the 
Commission proposals on waste legislation7 or the repeal of the Standardised Reporting 
Directive8, which will result in real benefits over the years to come. Indeed, changes have 
occurred or are under way in all the main environmental policy areas such as air, water 
and  nature  (see  table  1  of  SWD(2017)  230  for  an  overview).  These  changes  show  the 
potential to cut costs and improve the quality of information at the same time. 

Evaluations  of  environmental  legislation  under  the  regulatory  fitness  and  performance 
programme  (REFIT)  are  looking  at  environmental  reporting  and  monitoring  issues 
systematically. These evaluations are a main driver for change, where it is needed. This is 
the case, for example, with the evaluation of the INSPIRE Directive9.  

Progress  has  been  made  not  just  in  what  is  reported  but  also  in  how  it  is  reported. 
Information  technology  and  tools  have  made  the  reporting  process  much  easier  and 
quicker  are  being  used  more  widely.  Finally,  the  Commission  has  also  been  exploring 
different ideas and approaches such as improving active dissemination. 

4.  A ROADMAP FOR ACTION 

While  the  fitness  check  found  environmental  reporting  to  be  largely  fit-for-purpose,  it 
also identified issues that need to be tackled (see section 2). These will be addressed by 
taking action in five areas. This means: 

1.  getting the right information in the right form at the right time; 

2.  streamlining the reporting process; 

3.  promoting  active  dissemination  of  environmental 

information  at 

European and national level; 

4.  exploiting  other  data  sources  and  alternative  approaches  complementing 

environmental reporting; and 

5.  improving coherence and cooperation. 

5   Citizen Science is a growing worldwide phenomenon which describes the contribution of citizens to 

generate scientific information and knowledge (see "Environmental Citizen Science", 2013). 

6   SWD(2016) 188 
7   COM(2016) 789 and COM(2016) 793 
8   COM(2015) 593 - 596 
9   The  INSPIRE  Directive  creates  an  EU  spatial  data  infrastructure  for  the  purposes  of  environmental 
policies and related policies with an impact on environment (COM(2016) 478 and SWD(2016) 273). 

5 

 
                                                                                                                                                 
These  actions  reflect  the  need  to  have  a  common  approach  to  reporting.  This  means 
moving  from  a  system  where  reporting  develops  in  parallel  in  several  different 
environmental  policy  fields  to  a  more  standardised  approach  where  best  practice  is 
adopted across policy fields. 

To  this  end,  the  Commission  will  reinforce  the  capacity  of  the  European  Environment 
Agency (EEA) to assist in delivering on such an approach building on the experiences, 
tools  and  processes  already  established  at  the  Agency.  The  Commission  will  transfer 
budget  from  the  LIFE  Programme  (approximately  EUR  3.1  million  over  a  three  years 
pilot phase) and thereby enable the EEA to lead on the implementation of the action to 
modernise eReporting (see action 3 below) and help deliver on several others as indicated 
below10. This will complement the ongoing support regarding reporting and agreed future 
tasks (e.g. in relation to energy and climate policy) and improvements (e.g. in relation to 
Reportnet 2.0) as set out in the EEA's Multi-Annual and Annual Work Programme. The 
outcome  of  this  pilot  phase  will  then  be  taken  into  account  in  the  follow  up  to  the 
Commission-led  EEA-EIONET  evaluation  and  considerations 
the  EEA 
Regulation11. 

towards 

The result should be better quality information that is provided more easily and is more 
widely  used.  This  will  benefit  everybody  involved  or  interested  in  environmental 
reporting.  Administrations  will  benefit  through  reduced  administrative  burden.  The 
burden  for  business  will  be  reduced  if  Member  State  administrations  pass  on  the 
efficiency  gains  where  businesses  are  involved  in  reporting  and  regulatory  monitoring. 
Policy makers will have better quality information for policy development. Last but not 
least,  the  European  public,  businesses  and  administrations  will  have  better  access  to 
better environmental information. 

4.1.  Getting the right information in the right form at the right time 

The fitness check found that the existing reporting process for the environment is largely 
delivering  but  that  some  specific  improvements  could  be  made.  Some  of  these 
improvements,  such  as  the  alignment  of  timing,  can  only  be  made  by  amending 
legislation. Other changes do not require any legislative amendments but may be detailed 
in nature. 

Action 1: Legislative amendments to reporting obligations defined in selected pieces 
of legislation 

Timing:  Timing  set  for  different  pieces  of  legislation  in  line  with  the  need  to  make 
Commission proposal(s) 

In  addition  to  the  actions  already  outlined  in  section  3,  this  action  will  look  at  the 
findings on the need to amend individual pieces of legislation12. Based on a more detailed 
analysis  of  these  issues,  the  Commission  will  propose  legislative  amendments  which 
could address, for example: 

10   See Actions 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, & 10 
11   EEA Regulation (EC) No 401/2009  
12   Annex 8 of the fitness check evaluation (SWD(2017) 230) sets out indications on issues to be tackled 
for each piece of legislation on the use of textual information, indicators, usefulness, delays, coherence 
and format. 

6 

 
                                                 
–  the alignment of timing/frequency of reporting, where relevant; and 

–  the  elimination  of  redundant  or  other  reporting obligations which  are  no  longer 

useful. 

To ensure a systematic and comparable approach, the Commission will complement the 
approach advocated by the better regulation guidelines and introduce, as far as possible, 
standard provisions for environmental reporting obligations. 

Action 2: Assess and change reporting obligations in more detail as part of a rolling 
programme 

Timing: rolling work programme 

To ensure a systematic and comparable approach, the Commission will also implement 
the approach to environmental reporting outlined in this Report when evaluating existing 
EU environmental law and designing new legislative proposals (e.g. by streamlining the 
reporting process or by improving the provisions on public information). 

This  more  common,  scientific  approach  will  be  introduced  through  a  commitment  to 
examine reporting in more detail in all upcoming evaluations and proposals13. This takes 
advantage  of  the  regular  reviews  and  evaluations  that  enable  the  Commission,  in 
cooperation with  the  EEA  and  the  EU  Member  States14,  to  review  every  few  years  the 
information  requested  through  reporting.  At  the  same  time,  the  Commission  is  able  to 
consider how well the legislation is working more generally. In this context, the review 
will look systematically at the following possibilities: 

–  using    key  indicators  more  widely  and  structuring  information  on  the  most 
important implementation questions by referring to the DPSIR15 framework and 
the better regulation guidelines on regulatory monitoring; 

–  aligning  such  key  indicators  where  possible  with  the  wider  policy  needs  of  the 
Sustainable Ddevelopment Goals (SDGs), the 7th environment action programme 
(7EAP) and the Environment Implementation Review (EIR) to ensure a joined-
up approach; 

–  reducing the need to provide textual and contextual information or using closed 
questions  more  often  with  pre-defined,  prompted  possible  answers  where 
appropriate; 

–  using  information  publicly  available  at  national  level  rather  than  requesting  the 

information again from the Member States or businesses. 

The rolling programme will also look at the purpose of, and needs for reporting and the 
use  of  the  reported  information.  Moreover,  relevant  reporting  obligations  will  be 
reviewed  so  that  they  are  in  line  with  INSPIRE  data  specifications  or,  where  more 
effective,  so  that  the  data  specifications  are  adapted  to  ensure  consistency  with  the 

13   Idem. 
14   Expert groups on reporting exist under most of the identified legislative areas and/or the EEA EIONET 

framework which will be used to implement this rolling work programme.  

15   D: driving forces, P: pressures, S: state, I: impact, R: response.  

7 

 
                                                 
reporting  obligations.  The  aim  is  to  maximise  the  benefits  from  moving  towards  data 
interoperability without generating unnecessary costs. 

The ‘Drafting principles for smarter environmental reporting’ developed by the ‘Make IT 
Work’ initiative16 will be taken into account in this review process. 

4.2. 

Streamlining the reporting process 

Building on the investment already made in the reporting process, more can be done to 
make  full  use  of  the  ongoing  advances  in  information  technology  tools  including  the 
standardisation of practices and procedures. 

Action 3: Modernise eReporting including through a more advanced Reportnet and 
by making best use of the existing infrastructure 

Timing:  Reportnet  2.0  to  be  launched  in  2019, gradually  expanding  its capabilities and 
performance once launched 

To  promote  and  modernise  eReporting  with  the  latest IT  solutions,  the  EEA  initiated  a 
project called ‘Reportnet 2.0’.  Reportnet  is  the EEA’s infrastructure for supporting and 
improving data and information flows and is also used by some Commission departments 
for their reporting processes. It was designed for an earlier generation of EU environment 
policy and is currently under great strain due to the volume of data now being reported. 

The Commission will support the overhaul of this reporting infrastructure to establish it 
as the central and streamlined EU tool for environmental (and possibly other) reporting 
beyond the current ambition level of Reportnet 2.0 (which is mainly aimed at improving 
capacity and security). Reportnet will also have to respond to the ambition levels set out 
in  the  EU’s  Digital  Single  Market  agenda,  in  particular  those  laid  down  in  the 
eGovernment  action  plan17  and  the  European  Interoperability  Framework18.  The 
Commission will also explore the potential of Reportnet using cloud services and see if 
there  are  synergies  with  the  implementation  of  the  proposed  Energy  Union  governance 
Regulation19.  The  Commission  will  consider 
the  Shared 
Environmental  Information  Systems  (SEIS)20  initiative  and  build  on  the  achievements 
and  experiences  of  the  sectorial  information  systems  such  as  the  Water  or  Biodiversity 
Information Systems for Europe. 

learned  from 

lessons 

In this context, the Commission will promote the consistent and realistic application of 
the  INSPIRE  rules.  The  INSPIRE  REFIT  evaluation21  demonstrated  that  the  current 
implementation  of the Directive is not  fully aligned with the reporting needs under EU 
environment  law.  The  Commission  is  already  taking  steps  to  ensure  that  the  INSPIRE 

16   http://www.ieep.eu/work-areas/environmental-governance/better-regulation/make-it-

work/subjects/2015/08/monitoring-and-reporting 

17   COM(2016) 179 
18   COM(2017) 134 
19   See footnote 3  
20   COM(2008) 46 and SWD(2013) 18 
21   COM(2016) 478 and SWD(2016) 273 

8 

 
                                                 
implementation is giving ‘priority to environmental spatial datasets, in particular those 
linked to monitoring and reporting’22.  

Action 4: Develop and test tools for data harvesting at EU level 

Timing: Presentation of test results in 2018 

Data  harvesting  is  a  way  for  the  EU  institutions  to  access  data  at  the  national  or  local 
level without physically reporting it. In principle, this enables the EU level to have better 
and more flexible access to data while minimising inconvenience to others. 

So far, it has not been possible to develop an EU-level application to effectively harvest 
and  use  publicly  available  data.  Some  experience  exists,  but  further  development  and 
testing  of  such  tools  will  be  needed  before  they  can  become  operational.  The 
Commission, together with the EEA, will invest in the development of such tools and test 
some initial ideas before the end of 2018. This will include further improvement of the 
EU  Geoportal  and  its  link  to  the  Reportnet  project.  The  Commission  will  also  develop 
practical guidance on how data harvesting can be used more effectively in environment 
policy in the future to address the questions identified in the fitness check (e.g. on legal 
certainty). 

4.3. 

Promoting  active  dissemination  of  environmental 
European and national level 

information  at 

Reporting should not be for the use of the EU institutions alone. For example, it should 
also allow the public to better understand the state of the environment they live in. 

Action 5: Develop guidance and promote best practices for European and national 
environmental  information  systems  including  better  access  to  data  in  easy-to- 
understand ways 

Timing: Guidance and best practice examples to be published in 2018 

The Commission will promote active dissemination through guidance and the sharing of 
best  practice  at  European  and  national  levels,  in  full  implementation  of  the  INSPIRE 
Directive (see also action 6). This guidance will be developed in close consultation with 
Member  States  and  other  interested  groups.  It  will  build  on  the  experiences  of  the 
sectoral  work  and  pilot  projects,  in  particular  those  carried  out  in  the  context  of  the 
Structured Implementation and Information Framework (SIIF)23. This exercise will also 
link  into  the  international  processes  of  the  Aarhus  Convention  by  encouraging  a  more 
widespread use of electronic tools to disseminate information actively to the public in an 
easy-to-use, accessible manner. 

It  is  crucial  to  ensure  that  the  Member  States’  administrative  boundaries  are  not  an 
obstacle  to  data  flow  and  data  management.  There  should  be  a  seamless  flow  of 
information  among  the  public  authorities  and  to  the  public.  It  is  important  in 
implementing this action that this should also be the case in a cross-border context, and 
regardless of the Member State in which the information originated. 

22   http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/document-tags/mig-workprogramme  
23   For an example of such a pilot project, see http://uwwtd.oieau.fr/ 

9 

 
                                                 
Finally, all environmental data should be available via open access, and should be easy to 
retrieve and re-use, notably by researchers and scientists.  

Action 6: Promote full implementation of the INSPIRE Directive, giving priority to 
datasets most relevant for the implementation and reporting of EU environmental 
legislation 

Timing:  Member  States  to  publish  a  list  of  priority  datasets  in  line  with  INSPIRE  by 
2018 and review progress in 2019 on the basis of Member State reports 

As  a  follow-up  to  the  INSPIRE  evaluation,  the  Commission  is  in  the  process  of 
identifying  spatial  datasets  (falling  under 
to 
environmental  reporting  obligations24.  Under  the  INSPIRE  Directive,  Member  States 
must create relevant metadata for these datasets and make them available (through view, 
download  and  discovery  services)  at  national  level.  Few  Member  States  have  actually 
done  this.  Once  the  Commission  has  drawn  up  such  a  list,  in  cooperation  with  the 
Member States25, it will monitor the application of the INSPIRE obligations through the 
mechanism set out in that Directive. 

the  INSPIRE  Directive) 

linked 

4.4.  Exploring  the  potential  of  other  data  sources  and  approaches  to 

complement environmental reporting 

The potential to use other data sources such as Copernicus or citizen science as a tool to 
complement  reporting  or,  in  some  cases  as  an  alternative,  is  promising.  However, 
experience shows this may not be easy, and a number of questions have to be resolved. 

Action 7: Making better use of data generated through the Copernicus programme    

Timing: Establish actions in selected areas in 2017 

The  EU  earth  observation  programme,  Copernicus,  consists  of  a  constellation  of  EU-
owned satellites collecting an unprecedented volume of earth observation data. Thematic 
information obtained through Copernicus can play an important role in the environmental 
compliance assurance process by, for example, raising awareness, providing indications 
of non-compliance, and steering inspections. But such information can also be important 
for  environmental  monitoring  and  reporting.  Examples  already  exist  such  as  the  use  of 
satellite  imagery  to  track  changes  in  the  grassland  cover  in  a  Natura  2000  site.  To 
encourage these developments, follow-up actions will explore how the Copernicus data 
can be used to complement or generally improve the quality of the information used for 
reporting procedures and more widely for EU environment policy-making. These actions 
will build on EEA experiences and aim to further develop user requirements for nature, 
water  and  marine  policy  in  particular.  Moreover,  synergies  with  the  Global  Earth 
Observation  System  of  Systems  (GEOSS),  of  which  Copernicus  but  also  other 
international  and  pan-European  earth  observation  networks  are  a  part,  could  also  be 
explored. 

24   COM(2016) 478 and SWD(2016) 273 
25   A preliminary list is now available online. 

10 

 
 
 
                                                 
Action  8:  Promote  the  wider  use  of  citizen  science  to  complement  environmental 
reporting 

Timing: Stepwise actions leading to the development of guidelines in 2019 

Another  promising  source  for  complementary  information  and  data  on  environmental 
issues is citizen science26. This offers another way to collect environmental data that is 
cost-effective and is useful in providing early warnings about environmental trends and 
specific  problems.  At  the  same  time,  it  increases  awareness  and  empowers  people. 
However, despite an increasing amount of citizen science data and activities, in practice 
citizen  science  data  are  not  (yet)  used  widely  for  official  environmental  monitoring 
(especially  as  for  some  areas  the  data  is  not  on  par  with  scientifically  more  elaborate 
monitoring equipment) and reporting27. Nonetheless, it can trigger official reporting and 
action, for example if citizens report problems with a local landfill, and complement it. 

The Commission will continue promoting citizen science activities through EU research 
and innovation programmes. This includes developing technologies that allow citizens to 
contribute (e.g. to monitor air quality), promoting coordination between existing actions 
at  regional,  European  and  international  level  and  encouraging  as  well  as  disseminating 
best practices. 

4.5. 

Improving coherence and cooperation 

Action  9:  Improve  cooperation  in  the  sharing  and  use  of  data  gathered  in  other 
areas for the benefit of the environment 

Timing: Identify co-operation actions for improvement in 2017 

There are links between environmental reporting and reporting in other EU policy areas, 
in  particular  agriculture,  climate,  consumer  and  health,  energy,  maritime  and  fisheries 
policy, as well as statistics Some areas for improving cooperation on the use of existing 
data  at  EU  level  will  be  considered.  Information  submitted  to  other  Commission 
departments  can  be  better  used  in  some  areas  to  inform  environment  policy.  There  are 
good examples in this respect for example in the agri-environment-climate areas. Other 
actions  will  also  need  to  be  taken  including  an  assessment  of  the  extent  to  which  the 
Waste Statistics Regulation is consistent with reporting obligations under the revised EU 
waste legislation, once adopted. 

The  Commission’s  Fitness  Check  on  the  obligations  under  EU  energy  legislation28  to 
plan, report and monitor has also looked at related issues. There is potential for pooling 
resources  and  creating  links  (e.g.  for  the  indicators  or  electronic  reporting)  in  the 
implementation process of both streamlining exercises.  

The follow up will be implemented in a way that creates positive synergies for concerned 
policy areas. 

26   SWD(2016) 188 
27   http://eurobirdportal.org/ 
28   SWD(2016) 396 and 397 

11 

 
 
                                                 
Action  10:  Strengthen  cooperation  with  relevant  international  organisations  to 
streamline  reporting  and  information  management  between  the  EU  level  and  the 
international level 

Timing: Identify co-operation actions for improvement in 2017 

There are already a number of initiatives and cooperation mechanisms in place between 
the  EU  and  international  organisations  to  streamline  environmental  reporting.  Building 
on  this  cooperation,  the  Commission,  together  with  the  Member  States,  will  make 
additional  efforts  to  put  the  issue  systematically  on  the  agenda  of  the  international 
environmental agreements where this is not already the case. 

5.  CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK 

The fitness check for environmental reporting and regulatory monitoring has resulted in a 
comprehensive  evidence  base  of  the  strengths  and  weaknesses  of  the  current  situation. 
Overall, the approach to environmental policy is mature and proportionate. The current 
investment  by  Member  States  and  EU  bodies  results  in  significant  benefits.  It 
demonstrates  that  EU  environment  legislation  delivers  tangible  benefits  and  that  the 
European  public  is  being  informed  of  these.  Despite  this  generally  positive  situation, 
many streamlining activities have been undertaken or are nearing completion. The fitness 
check also  identified  a number of specific and cross-cutting areas where improvements 
can be made or new avenues can be explored, for example in view of possibilities offered 
by new technologies to provide rapid and geographically specific evidence. 

These  additional  actions  will  put  environmental  reporting  on  a  path  towards  more 
transparency,  more  focused  reporting  and  more  effective  regulatory  monitoring.  They 
will  streamline  the  obligations  further,  thus  reducing  administrative  burden  while 
strengthening  our  evidence  base.  This  will  benefit  administrations,  businesses  and  the 
European  public.  The  reduction  of  administrative  burden  will  be  achieved  whilst 
maintaining  or  improving  the  benefits,  mainly  through  efficiency  gains  and  increased 
transparency (i.e. wider public dissemination of information).  

The Commission will monitor progress in implementing these actions and take stock of 
the situation in 2019. 

12 

 
 
 
Annex: Overview of proposed actions 

No  Action 

Timing 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Legislative  amendments  to  reporting  obligations 
defined in selected pieces of legislation. 

Timings set for different pieces of legislation 
in  line  with  the  need  to  make  Commission 
proposal(s). 

Assess  and  change  reporting  obligations  in  more 
detail as part of a rolling programme. 

Rolling work programme. 

Modernise  eReporting  including  through  a  more 
advanced  Reportnet  and  making  best  use  of  the 
existing infrastructure. 

to  be 

Reportnet  2.0 
in  2019 
expanding  its  capabilities  and  performance 
gradually thereafter. 

launched 

Develop  and  test  tools  for  data  harvesting  at  EU 
level. 

Presentation of test results in 2018. 

Develop  guidance  and  promote  best  practices  for 
European  and  national  environmental  information 
systems  including  better  access  to  data  in  easy  to 
understand ways. 

Guidance  and  best  practice  examples  to  be 
published in 2018. 

Promote  the  full  implementation  of  the  INSPIRE 
Directive  with  priority  for  datasets  most  relevant 
for  the  implementation  and  reporting  of  EU 
environmental legislation. 

Member  States  to  publish  list  of  priority 
datasets  in  line  with  INSPIRE  by  2018  and 
review  progress  in  2019  on  the  basis  of 
Member State reports.   

Make  better  use  of  data  generated  through  the 
Copernicus programme. 

Establish actions in selected areas in 2017. 

Promote  the  wider  use  of  citizen  science  to 
complement environmental reporting. 

Stepwise  actions  leading  to  development  of 
guidelines in 2019. 

Improve cooperation in the sharing and use of data 
gathered  in  other  areas  for  the  benefit  of  the 
environment. 

Identify 
improvement in 2017 

co-operation 

actions 

for 

10 

Strengthen cooperation with relevant international 
organisations with the view to streamline reporting 
and  information  management  between  the  EU 
level and the international level. 

Identify 
improvement in 2017 

co-operation 

actions 

for 

13