COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance
Date: 2018-01-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU environmental policy, action programme, application of EU law, environmental cooperation, environmental law, environmental protection, pollution control measures

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 18.1.2018 COM(2018) 10 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance {SWD(2018) 10 final}  
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance 

1. 

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 

This  Communication  presents  an  Action  Plan  to  increase  compliance  with  EU 
environmental law and improve environmental governance. It involves the Commission 
working hand in hand with Member States and professionals such as inspectors, auditors, 
police  officers  and  prosecutors  in  order  to  create  a  smart  and  collaborative  culture  of 
compliance  with  EU  environmental  rules  on  activities  such  as  industrial  production, 
waste disposal and agriculture. 

The  EU  already  has  an  extensive  body  of  mature  environmental  legislation.  However, 
there  are  major  challenges  to  its  implementation,  as  highlighted  in  the  Commission’s 
Environmental  Implementation  Review  (EIR)1.  These  are 
to  persistent 
environmental  problems  such  as  diffuse  water  pollution,  poor  urban  air  quality, 
unsatisfactory waste treatment, and species and habitats in decline. There is also a serious 
incidence  of  environmental  crime,2  and  a  high  number  of  environmental  complaints  to 
the  Commission3  and  petitions  to  the  European  Parliament.  The  costs  of  non-
implementation are estimated at 50 EUR billion per year.4 Many benefits can be obtained 
through improved implementation without creating new legislation.  

linked 

This requires, amongst other things, compliance with environmental rules on the ground, 
i.e.  industry,  utilities,  landowners  and  other  ‘duty-holders’5  fulfilling  environmental 
obligations  concerning  their  activities.  Obligations  may  be  in  the  form  of  prohibitions, 
general binding rules, permits and other measures put in place to protect the environment, 
public health and society’s long-term resource needs. 

1  

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eir/country-reports/index_en.htm. 

2   Combined estimates from the OECD, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), UNEP and INTERPOL on 

the monetary value of all environmental crime show that it is the 4th largest international crime. 

3  

Six hundred or so per annum. 

4  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/economics_policy/pdf/report_sept2011.pdf.  The  cost  elements  include, 
amongst others, environmental and health costs, unrealized benefits in the green industries, market distortions and 
administrative costs for industry.  

5  

i.e.  natural  or  legal  persons,  including  public  authorities,  who  must  respect  obligations  derived  from  EU 
environment legislation when carrying out activities that involve emissions into or other physical impacts on the 
environment. 

1 

 
 
                                                            
Weak  mechanisms  for  securing  compliance  and  effective  governance  at  national, 
regional and local level are among the causes of implementation failure.6 They are also a 
factor  in  unfair  competition7  and  economic  harm  such  as  loss  of  tax  revenue,  and 
undermine public confidence in the effectiveness of EU laws.  

This  Communication  aims  to  strengthen  such  mechanisms.  It  complements  the 
Communication  ‘EU  law:  Better  results  through  better  application’  in  which  the 
Commission set out how it will step up its efforts on the application, implementation and 
enforcement of EU law in general.8  

2.  THE NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE  

Member States are bound by a duty to co-operate in good faith on the achievement of EU 
objectives.9  The Court  of Justice has derived from this a requirement on Member State 
authorities  to  redress  the  unlawful  consequences  of  a  breach  of  EU  law10  and  a 
requirement that enforcement be effective, proportionate and dissuasive11. Member States 
must  therefore  have  appropriate  mechanisms  in  place  to  ensure  compliance  with  EU-
derived obligations. 

Non-compliance  may  occur 
including  confusion,  poor 
understanding  or  lack  of  acceptance  of  rules,  lack  of  investment,  opportunism  and 
criminality. Its impacts on the environment, human health and the economy will depend 
on the nature, scale and persistence of breaches. 

for  different 

reasons, 

In  practice,  mechanisms  for  securing  compliance  involve  Member  States  using  three 
broad  classes  of  intervention  (collectively  referred  to  as  ‘environmental  compliance 
assurance’):  

  compliance promotion helps duty-holders to comply through means such as guidance, 

‘frequently asked questions’ and help-desks;  

  compliance  monitoring  identifies  and  characterises  duty-holder  conduct  and  detects 
and assesses any non-compliance, using environmental inspections and other checks; 

  follow-up  and  enforcement  draw  on  administrative,  criminal  and  civil  law  to  stop, 
deter,  sanction  and  obtain  redress  for  non-compliant  conduct  and  encourage 
compliance.  

6  

‘The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver 
better results’ (COM(2017) 63). 

7   The legitimate waste industry has already warned of this, as illegal waste operators can under-cut legitimate ones, 

e.g. by disposing of waste at illegal sites. 

2017/C 18/02. 

See Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union. 

8  

9  

10   See for example Case C-201/02 Wells, EU:2004:12, paragraphs 64-65. 

11   See for example Case 68/88 Commission v Greece [1989] ECR 2965, paragraphs 23 and 24.  

2 

 
                                                            
These  interventions  are  carried  out  by  different  kinds  of  Member  State  authorities. 
Bodies  with  inspection  roles  typically  carry  out  routine  or  ad  hoc  checks  and  promote 
compliance. Police officers and prosecution services have important roles in investigating 
and  prosecuting  serious  wrong-doing.  Different  bodies  may  be  linked  across  an 
‘environmental  compliance  assurance  chain’,  as  where  inspectors,  customs  and  police 
officers and prosecutors co-operate in evidence-gathering and prosecution. Audit bodies 
can exercise a valuable function in looking at problems of generalised non-compliance or 
the performance of particular authorities. 

Environmental  compliance  assurance  mitigates  the  risk  of  some  duty-holders  not 
respecting  their  obligations  and  therefore  negatively  impacting  the  state  of  water,  air, 
biodiversity,  human  health  and  the  economy.  It  does  so  by  assessing  the  causes  and 
impacts of non-compliance and by using an adaptable combination of the three classes of 
intervention to influence duty-holder conduct. The concept12 has developed over time in 
exchanges with experts, e.g. from Member States and practitioner networks.13 

3.  CHALLENGES  

Member  State  authorities  responsible  for  environmental  compliance  assurance  face 
numerous challenges, in particular: 

  the  extent  and  diversity  of  EU  environmental  rules  on  activities  with  environmental 

impacts, 

  the fact that they cover the whole territories of Member States, rural as well as urban 

areas, 

  the existence of recognised problems with water and air pollution, waste disposal and 

nature in decline, 

  the expectations of the public, 

  the number and diversity of those who must comply with environmental rules, 

  the many different kinds of compliance problems that can present themselves, 

  the  difficulties  with  detecting  and  addressing  these,  in  particular  environmental 

crimes. 

Capacity can be added to this list as well, as responsibilities are often allocated to smaller 
bodies  with  limited  financial  resources,  low  staff  numbers  or  a  lack  of  specialist 
knowledge.14  In  many  Member  States,  the  budgets  of  environmental  inspectorates 

12   Further details are presented in the staff working document accompanying this Communication SWD(2018)10. 

13  See 

for  example 

‘Make 

it  Work’  guiding  principles  on  environmental  compliance  assurance: 

http://minisites.ieep.eu/work-areas/environmental-governance/better-regulation/make-it-
work/subjects/2015/08/compliance-assurance. 

14   See for instance the implementation challenges report of the EU Network for Implementation and Enforcement of 
Environmental  Law  (IMPEL)  at  https://www.impel.eu/impel-study-confirms-that-significant-challenges-remain-
in-implementing-eu-environmental-law/. An updated report confirms and amplifies the findings. 

3 

 
                                                            
stagnated  or  decreased  due  to  the  financial  crisis.  In  the  face  of  these  challenges,  even 
large, well-resourced authorities can find it difficult to independently develop knowledge 
of the best ways to ensure compliance. 

The  challenges  faced  by  these  authorities  have  resulted  in  a  demand  for  and  the 
emergence  of  different  forms  of  support  at  EU  level.  These  types  of  support  are 
summarised in Table 1 below, together with their specific benefits.  

Table 1: Forms of support for ensuring environmental compliance and their benefits 

Type of support 

Benefits 

EU networks for practitioners 

EU-level evaluation of Member State 
environmental compliance assurance 
systems 

Enable practitioners to exchange knowledge 
and experience and together develop some of 
the other forms of support included in this table  

Enables comparison and identification of 
strengths and weaknesses 

Generally accessible information portals on 
compliance assurance 

Enable learning, sharing of good practices and 
easy comparison, and strengthen transparency 
and accountability 

Mechanisms to facilitate cooperation, 
coordination, knowledge and experience-
sharing and working together across the EU 
and input on compliance assurance from 
other Member States and authorities 

Enable greater effectiveness by working 
together 

Enables learning from specialist knowledge 
that has been developed elsewhere 

Cross-compliance under the Common 
Agricultural Policy (CAP) 

Contributes to ensuring farmers’ compliance 
with environmental obligations  

Information and guidance on good practices  Enables learning from knowledge that has 

already been gained 

Reduces the need to develop good practices 
from scratch (efficiency gains) 

Training programmes, training materials 
and guidance on skills 

Enables skills to be developed and maintained 

Accessibility of EU-generated data sources, 
such as satellite imagery 

Extends possibilities for effective compliance 
assurance 

EU financial support 

Helps compliance assurance authorities to 
better deliver their objectives 

Inspectors,  police  officers,  customs  officials,  prosecutors,  judges  and  auditors  have 
already  formed  separate  networks  at  European  level  to  share  and  build  knowledge  on 

4 

 
 
compliance assurance.15 They and others offer positive examples of the different kinds of 
support summarised above. Allowing for their current limitations in coverage and scope, 
these  examples  point  the  way  towards  how,  with  the  Commission’s  contribution,  more 
can be done to strengthen environmental governance and increase compliance.16 

4.  RATIONALE FOR ACTIONS 

The  Commission  has  considered  a  number  of  options  to  improve  environmental 
compliance  assurance,  including  legislative  ones,  and  in  2014  prepared  a  draft  impact 
assessment report to inform its decision-making. It has concluded that an action plan with 
targeted support measures to address practical needs is the option most likely to deliver 
results across several priority areas already in the short term.  

The  preparatory  phase,  including  consultation  of  Member  States  and  practitioner 
networks17,  confirmed  the  value  of  the  forms  of  support  summarised  in  Table  1  and 
identified  ways  of  strengthening  these  and  developing  new  tools.  Practitioner  networks 
stressed  the  value  of  sharing  expertise  and  of  having  more  coordinated  efforts  across 
Member  States.  They  pointed  to  the  importance  of  professional  training  and  effective 
knowledge-sharing. Consultations also identified a number of sectors in which there is a 
significant  demand  for  good  practice  reference  material  and  new  tools.  Waste  and 
wildlife  crime  were  singled  out  as  especially  deserving  of  attention.  The  common 
agricultural policy (CAP) 2014-2020 prioritises the ‘sustainable management of natural 
resources  and  climate  action’  through  a  variety  of  complementary  policy  instruments, 
including cross-compliance. The Commission’s staff working document on ‘Agriculture 
and  sustainable  water  management  in  the  EU’18  has  already  referred  to  the  initiative 
being  presented  here  as  offering  a  means  of  improving  national  compliance  assurance 
systems  for  water 
the 
Commission's  Action  Plan  for  nature,  people  and  the  economy19  identifies  the  need  to 
strengthen  compliance20.  Other  themes  that  have  featured  in  the  consultations  are  the 
contribution  that  technology  can  make  to  detecting  non-compliance  and  the  important 
role  that  citizens  play  in  making  complaints  and  submissions  to  national  authorities. 
Some existing EU environmental legislation explicitly foresees the role of guidelines or 

to  farming  activities.  Similarly, 

in  relation 

legislation 

15  

Inspectors  are  represented  by  the  EU  Network  for  Implementation  and  Enforcement  of  Environmental  Law 
(IMPEL). Police officers are represented by EnviCrimeNet, prosecutors by the European Network of Prosecutors 
for  the  Environment  (ENPE),  judges  by  the  EU  Forum  of  Judges  for  the  Environment  (EUFJE),  and 
environmental  auditors  by  a  specialised  working  group  on  environmental  auditing  within  the  European 
Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (EUROSAI). 

16   See  IMPEL’s  position  paper  on  environmental  compliance  assurance  https://www.impel.eu/position-paper-on-

environmental-compliance-assurance/. ENPE also submitted a similar position paper. 

17   See for example the summaries of a stakeholder conference of 31 January 2017 and a workshop of 20 March 2017 

available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/law/inspections.htm  

18   SWD(2017)153, final, 28.4.2017. 

19   COM(2017) 198 final and SWD(2017) 139 final. 

20   See in particular Priority B 'Building political ownership and strengthening compliance'. 

5 

 
                                                            
guidance on inspections21 and it is opportune to make a start on delivering these. Work on 
the  first  EIR  country-specific  reports  highlighted  the  scope  for  improving  the 
Commission’s feedback to Member States on compliance assurance and other aspects of 
public  administration.  Finally,  consultations  have  identified  a  desire  for  high-level 
dialogue between environmental compliance assurance practitioners and senior managers 
within environmental administrations.  

5.  ACTIONS 

The  Action  Plan  consists  of  nine  actions  tailored  to  the  above  needs  identified  in  the 
preparatory phase. They are summarised in Table 222.  

Table 2: Overview of actions  

No 

Action 

Improve deployment of environmental compliance assurance expertise 
across  the  EU  by  means  of  peer  reviews,  joint  enforcement  actions, 
compliance assurance visits and use of the TAIEX-EIR Peer2Peer tool23 

Identify  necessary  professional  skill-sets  and  training  needs  for 
environmental  inspectors  and  improve  cooperation  with  practitioner  and 
other  bodies  promoting  excellence  and  providing  training  for  compliance 
assurance professionals at national and European level 

Facilitate  the  sharing  of  good  practices,  background  and  reference 
material,  promote  funding  opportunities  for  environmental  compliance 
assurance,  and  explore 
the  setting  up  of  a  wider  environmental 
implementation portal 

Prepare a good practice guidance document on strategies for combating 
environmental  crimes  and  other  related  breaches,  with  a  particular 
focus on waste and wildlife offences 

Prepare  guidance  document(s)  on  good  practices  in  environmental 
compliance assurance in rural areas (in relation to land and water)  

Timing 

2019 

2018 

2019 

2019 

2019 

Prepare technical guidelines for inspections of extractive waste facilities  

2018 

Prepare  documentation  on  good  practices 
in  the  handling  of 
environmental  complaints  and  citizen  engagement  at  Member  State 
level,  including  through  citizen  science  and  work  with  Member  States  to 
share  good  practices  on  effective  national  complaint-handling 
mechanisms concerning EU environmental law  

2019 

Build  up  the  capacity  and  use  of  geospatial  intelligence  for  compliance 
assurance and promote good practice projects (e.g. using Copernicus data)  

2019 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

21   See  Article  22(1)  (d)  of  Directive  2006/21/EC  on  the  management  of  waste  from  extractive  industries  and 
amending  Directive  2004/35/EC,  OJ  L  102,  11.4.2006,  p.  15  and  Article  23(4)  of  Directive  2010/75/EU  on 
industrial emissions, OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17.  

22   Further details are given in the accompanying staff working document SWD(2018)10.  

23   http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eir/p2p/index_en.htm  

6 

 
 
                                                            
No 

Action 

9 

Assess  national  environmental  compliance  assurance  systems  as  part  of  a 
wider  governance  assessment  framework  and  regularly present  feedback 
to  Member  States,  also  as  part  of  the  Environmental  Implementation 
Review  

Timing 

2019 

6. 

STRENGTHENING COOPERATION  

On the one hand, as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission has a key role in ensuring 
the  full  and  correct  application  of  EU  environmental  law  under  the  control  of  the 
European  Court  of  Justice.  On  the  other  hand,  Member  States  have  the  primary 
responsibility of correctly implementing EU law. The present Action Plan will contribute 
to addressing the challenges that the latter face which have been mentioned at the outset. 

To ensure that this Action Plan has the desired results, Member States are invited to: 

  facilitate participation of their authorities in network cooperation at EU level; 

  ensure that identified good practices, in particular those related to the use of risk-based 
approaches and transparency, are taken up and that tools developed under the Action 
Plan are used; 

  facilitate training and the development of professionals skills; 

  ensure  the  right  level  of  cooperation  and  coordination  between  authorities  with 

compliance assurance functions; 

  ensure  an  appropriate  allocation  of  human  and  financial  resources  for  compliance 

assurance across their territories. 

The Commission is also setting up an expert group (‘the Environmental Compliance and 
Governance  Forum’)24  in  order  to  provide  steering  for  the  Action  Plan  and  allow  an 
exchange  of  views  with  Member  State  senior  managers  on  how  to  improve  the 
compliance and governance aspects of implementation. This Forum will in particular be 
composed of representatives of Member States and EU-level practitioner networks, with 
representatives  of  the  Council,  Parliament,  Committee  of  the  Regions  and  European 
Economic and Social Committee invited to participate. The Commission will also seek to 
involve  other  interested  stakeholders,  including  NGOs  and  business  organisations,  and 
will  discuss  the  best  ways  of  doing  so  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  Environmental 
Compliance and Governance Forum.  

Delivery  of  the  actions  will  be  a  collaborative  process,  involving  not  just  the 
Environmental  Compliance  and  Governance  Forum  but  the  practitioner  networks.  The 
networks will be offered assistance to facilitate their collaboration. The Commission will 
also continue to support them in their broader roles.  

24   C(2018)10.  

7 

 
                                                            
Existing EU funding instruments, such as LIFE25 and the Internal Security Fund (ISF)26, 
can  offer  tangible  ways  of  supporting  different  kinds  of  compliance  assurance  and 
governance  activities.  Member  States,  practitioner  networks  and  other  stakeholders  are 
therefore encouraged to make full use of them. 

In  developing  the  Action  Plan,  the  Commission  will  also  take  account  of  important 
external and global dimensions of EU environmental law, as reflected in EU participation 
in regional and global conventions. For example, global trade and global supply chains 
are relevant to waste management and protection of biodiversity. Indeed, environmental 
compliance assurance has broad global relevance, being necessary amongst other things 
for delivery of sustainable development goals. Strengthening it within Europe will help 
the Union to lead by example and be an effective partner at international level.  

7.  MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP 

This  Action  Plan  will  form  the  basis  of  a  rolling  work-programme  for  2018-2019.  The 
programme will be reviewed during 2019 and new actions will be added as appropriate, 
after consultation with the Environmental Compliance and Governance Forum. 

The envisaged assessment framework (Action 9) will create a basis for examining how 
environmental compliance assurance and public administration is progressing within the 
Member States, allow follow-up through the EIR, and assess by the end of the first work 
programme whether other initiatives are necessary in this area.  

8.  CONCLUSIONS 

This  Action  Plan  responds  to  a  demand  for  practical  support  to  practitioners  working 
across  the  EU  to  help  improve  compliance  assurance  and  governance  in  the  field  of 
environment. Over and above the specific benefits already mentioned, the plan will help 
to  collectively  establish  a  more  consistent  EU  approach  to  tackling  environmental 
compliance and governance challenges. The results should enable practitioners to: better 
address breaches of environmental rules and unfair competition as well as the harm they 
cause; better assist duty holders to fulfil their obligations; better secure public confidence 
in compliance assurance, and, last but not least, better protect Europe's common heritage. 

25   Regulation  (EU)  No  1293/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11  December  2013  on  the 
establishment of a Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 
614/2007, OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p.185. 

26   Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as 
part  of  the  Internal  Security  Fund,  the  instrument  for  financial  support  for  police  cooperation,  preventing  and 
combating crime, and crisis management and repealing Council Decision 2007/125/JHA, OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 
93.  

8