COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Towards a monitoring and outlook framework for the zero pollution ambition 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 Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil'
Date: 2021-05-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU action, air quality, climate change policy, environmental protection, industrial pollution, noise pollution, pollution control measures, soil pollution, sustainable development, water pollution

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 12.5.2021  SWD(2021) 141 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Towards a monitoring and outlook framework for the zero pollution ambition  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 Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All      EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil' {COM(2021) 400 final} - {SWD(2021) 140 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 

1. 

2. 

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2 

Purpose, objectives and targets .............................................................................. 4 

Background .............................................................................................................. 6 
3. 
3.1.  A short history of pollution monitoring ..................................................................... 6 
3.2.  Achievement and challenges of existing pollution monitoring ............................... 10 
3.3.  Other existing and foreseen policy monitoring frameworks ................................... 12 

4. 
Zero Pollution Monitoring .................................................................................... 17 
4.1.  Concept .................................................................................................................... 17 
4.2.  Monitoring key impacts / harm ............................................................................... 21 
4.2.1.  Pollution, human health and well-being .................................................... 21 
4.2.2.  Pollution, ecosystems and planetary boundaries ....................................... 22 
4.3.  Monitoring key pressures and sources..................................................................... 25 
4.4.  Monitoring key drivers and responses ..................................................................... 27 
Innovative research initiatives monitoring pollution in an integrated way ............. 28 
4.5. 

5. 

6. 

Zero pollution outlook and foresight ................................................................... 32 

Data, knowledge needs and data management ................................................... 35 

7.  Governance, milestones and deliverables ............................................................ 38 

8. 

Conclusions and next steps ................................................................................... 40 

Annex 1:  Non-exhaustive  overview  of  relevant  targets  and  objectives  for  pollution  set 

out in EU policies and laws 

Annex 2:  Indicative  list  of  proposed  indicators  to  be  explored  for  the  zero  pollution 

monitoring framework 

Annex 3:  Overview  of  possible  pollutants  to  be  covered  by  the  zero  pollution  outlook 

report  

Annex 4:  Illustrative  example  on  handling  of  chemical  monitoring  data  in  water 

environment  

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION  

Pollution  has  major  negative  impacts:  it  affects  human  health  and  puts  pressure  on  the 
species, ecosystems and their services that we want to protect.  For several decades, the 
EU and its Member States have been monitoring different types of pollution1 in relation 
to  their  presence  (concentration)  in  the  environment  (state),  their  impacts,  the  amounts 
entering the environment (pressures) and the sources from which the pollution originates 
(drivers). And then the most effective actions to be taken are identified (response)2. Such 
a holistic and integrated monitoring framework already exists for greenhouse gas (GHG) 
emissions,  for  air  pollution  affecting  human  health,  for  marine  oil  spill  detection  and 
monitoring3 and several other environment policy areas4, where it is possible not only to 
determine the past and current pollution levels (monitoring), but also to predict, through 
modelling  systems,  possible  sources  of  pollution  and  future  trends  based  on  various 
scenarios or assumptions (outlook).  

However, pollution monitoring framework at the EU level or beyond is not as connected 
and  integrated  across  media,  pollutants  or  sectors  as  it  could  be.  It  is  often  a  set  of 
independent  pollution  monitoring  systems  covering  the  various  pollution  domains 
covered by EU environmental policy. For many pollution types, only certain elements of 
such  a  monitoring  framework  are  well  developed.  But  all  this  has  been  changing  for 
some  time  now  and  there  is  an  opportunity  to  use  the  zero  pollution  ambition  to  take 
monitoring and outlook efforts to the next level.  

Due  to  stronger  legally  binding  frameworks,  EU  level  monitoring  for  air  and  water 
pollution has been more advanced than for soil but efforts are underway to close the gap. 
Furthermore, land-based and marine pollution or cross-media (air, water5, soil) transfers 
of pollution can be further integrated. Data gathering or developing models necessary for 
policy making is becoming easier and more sophisticated, e.g. by reducing technical and 
administrative  obstacles  in  accessing  up-to-date  data  and  using  new  technologies  and 
thereby reducing the costs associated with the collection and assessment of data. Reliable 
fit-for-purpose data are at the base of all assessments, a good strategy and efficient set-up 
is  needed  in  order  to  be  cost  effective.  New  approaches  will  allow  progress  (target 
screening, etc.), while previously costs have been prohibitive. 

Once  data  have  been  collected  at  EU  level,  there  are  many  different  assessments 
addressing  pollution  issues  and  messages  stemming  from  a  variety  of  pollution-related 
analysis  can  sometimes  be  confusing  (see  chapter  4).  They  are  mainly  based  on 
indicators related to specific types of pollution across the various domains covered by EU 

1   See  Article  3(2)  Industrial  Emissions  Directive  2010/75/EU:  “Pollution  means  the  direct  or  indirect 
introduction, as a result of human activity, of substances, vibrations, heat or noise into air, water or 
land  which  may  be  harmful  to  human  health  or  the  quality  of  the  environment,  result  in  damage  to 
material property, or impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment”.   
2   This  DPSIR  (drivers-pressures-state-impact-response)  conceptual  monitoring  framework  developed 
and used by the European Environment Agency (EEA) (and used increasingly by other bodies, e.g. the 
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)) frames 
the reality in a simplified way. 

3   CleanSeaNet service of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) 
4   An  illustrative  example  is  the  Circular  Economy  Monitoring  Framework  (COM(2018)  29  and 

5  

SWD(2018) 17)  
In most instances throughout the document, ‘water’ is mentioned in the sense of freshwater and marine 
water. 

2 

 
                                                      
laws (air, noise, water, marine, nature and biodiversity, soils, chemicals, nutrients, waste, 
plastic,  industrial  emissions  etc.).  They  were  developed  and  implemented  ‘from  the 
bottom up’, focussing on the needs and obligations of the particular pieces of legislation. 
The  European  Green  Deal  can  help  create  the  momentum  to  extract  and  communicate 
pollution-related issues in a more integrated narrative, giving a coherent policy message 
or create synergies for actions where root causes are similar.  

Hence,  the  Zero  Pollution  ambition  for  a  non-toxic  environment  announced  in  the 
European Green Deal6 provides the impetus and mandate to improve knowledge on the 
presence,  effects  and  flows  of  pollutants  in  the  environment  and  to  integrate  this 
knowledge into a coherent and holistic framework. Moreover, the use of a variety of data 
sources and their integration will result in comparative advantages by cohesively merging 
and  dynamically  visualizing  complex  environmental  data  together  with  other  data  (e.g. 
economic, social or health-related data). This can be achieved by adhering to fully open 
data policies and enabling the discovery of, access to, licensing and use of environmental 
data originating from different data custodians and regimes, in full respect of the existing 
data  protection  rules7.  Similarly,  scenarios  and  modelling  used  for  outlook  analyses  as 
well as the underlying data need to be transparent and open to review. Building on these 
data and other information sources, it will be ultimately important better link the policy 
debate and the assessment debate and to improve the science-policy interface. 

The  Zero  Pollution  Action  Plan  for  air,  water  and  soil  offers  the  opportunity  for  the 
development  and  regular  application  of  such  an  integrated  monitoring  and  outlook 
framework,  complementing  the  monitoring  framework  for  greenhouse  gases  set  up  to 
monitor  the  EU’s  climate  reduction  and  carbon  neutrality  targets8  and  the  monitoring 
frameworks which aim to  track the targets  set  out  in  the Biodiversity Strategy9  and the 
Farm  to  Fork  Strategy10.  Together  with  the  Monitoring  Framework  for  the  Circular 
Economy11  and  the  indicator  framework  on  chemicals12,  these  elements  can  build  the 
core pillars for a newly developed environmental monitoring framework foreseen under 
the 8th Environment Action Programme (8th EAP)13.   

The  monitoring  framework  will  also  be  compatible  with  the  Better  Regulation 
Guidelines14  and  make  best  use  of  the  European  Environment  Agency’s  (EEA)  and 
IPBES’s  DPSIR  frameworks15.  Moreover,  it  can  ultimately  help  also  to  underpin  the 
Commission’s  performance  framework  for  the  European  Green  Deal  and  other 
monitoring  efforts,  e.g.  under  the  European  Semester  and  the  EU's  Sustainable 
Development Goals (SDGs) monitoring framework.  

Consequently, the purpose of this document is to  

6   COM(2019) 640 
7   Set out by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 
8   The  monitoring,  reporting  and  outlook  framework  for  greenhouse  gas  emissions  and  its  link  to  air 
monitoring  and  outlook  serves  as  an  inspiration  for  the  zero  pollution  monitoring  and  outlook 
framework. Consistency and complementarity will be ensured but it is excluded from the scope of this 
paper.  

9   COM(2020) 380  
10   COM(2020) 381 
11     SWD(2018) 17  
12   COM(2020) 667 
13   COM(2020) 652 
14   COM(2017)350, in particular section V on monitoring 
15   see footnote 1 

3 

 
                                                      
 

initiate  a  consultation  with  experts  from  Member  States, 
international 
organisations  and  other  stakeholders  with  the  aim  to  develop  a  common 
understanding and ownership;  

  scope and frame an initial outline and content for a zero pollution monitoring and 

outlook framework (as contribution to the wider 8th EAP monitoring);  

  plan  the  work  ahead  and  identify  actions  where  further  efforts  are  needed  to 
ensure  that  the  monitoring  and  outlook  generate  timely  and  policy  relevant 
information. 

The outcome of the consultation will be taken into account for the preparation of the first 
Zero  Pollution  Monitoring  and  Outlook  Report  in  2022  and  to  further  develop  the 
coherent/policy-relevant zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework until 2024 as 
an  input  to  wider  monitoring  frameworks  such  as  the  8th  Environment  Action 
Programme, the Sustainable Development Goals and the EEA’s regular reports on ‘The 
European Environment: State and Outlook’16.  

2.  PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS 

The  overall  purpose  and  objective(s)  for  the  zero  pollution  monitoring  and  outlook 
framework are set  out  in the Action Plan17. They  build on the overall (Article 2.1) and 
specific (Article 2.2 (d), (e) and (f)) objectives set out in the Commission Proposal for an 
8th  Environment  Action  Programme18  (8th  EAP).  This  monitoring  framework  is 
implementing the ‘zero pollution’ part of the overarching monitoring set out in Article 4 
of that Proposal.   

Building  on  these  overarching  objectives,  the  specific  purposes  of  the  monitoring  and 
outlook framework are to be:   

  A  knowledge  system  driving  the  zero  pollution  ambition  towards  2050  and  a 
means  for  communication,  allowing  for  accountability  and  engagement  of 
citizens; 

  A  contribution  to  defining  wellbeing19  and  planetary  boundaries  linked  to 
pollution including the ambition to have (at some point) an integrated assessment 
of  the  total  pollution  load  (exposure)  on  human  health  and  (impact)  on  species 
and ecosystems; 

  A  tool  to  measure  the  progress  of  the  zero  pollution  ambition  including  the 
illustration of some successful or challenging policy and implementation progress 
and effectiveness illustrated through a few telling examples as well as identifying 
synergies and strengthening coherence with related policy areas; 

  A  driver  for  change  towards  a  more  streamlined,  simplified,  modern,  digital 
monitoring  and  reporting  as  well  as  the  uptake  of  new  digital  and  earth 
observation  technologies  resulting  in  real-near  time  data  flows  presented  in  an 
accessible way, while reducing administrative burden. 

16   https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer 
17   COM(2021) 400 
18   COM(2020) 652 
19   The wellbeing framework is rather broad (see e.g.  OECD), in the context of this document it focuses 

on the health dimension which is an integral part of the wellbeing framework.   

4 

 
                                                      
The  approach  is  also  designed  to  create  an  overarching,  integrated  monitoring  that 
satisfies the Better Regulation Guidelines, in particular Section V. Hence, the monitoring 
and  outlook  framework  will  cover  the  entire  scope  of  the  zero  pollution  ambition 
including the monitoring systems developed under Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, 
the pollution dimension of the upcoming EU Soil Strategy and the upcoming Integrated 
Nutrient  Management  Action  Plan.  In  terms  of  scope,  the  definitions  of  pollution  and 
pollutants  as  set  out  in  EU  legislation20  provide  for  a  wide  coverage  of  releases  to  the 
environment. Moreover, the pollution of soil21 will include land in the wider sense where 
this is relevant.  
The  Zero  Pollution  Action  Plan22  has  set  out  an  overarching  vision  for  2050  some 
illustrative targets  for 2030 in  addition  to  a number of objectives and targets  set  out  in 
other  Green  Deal  initiatives  (namely  the  Farm  to  Fork  Strategy  and  the  Chemicals 
Strategy).  These  policy  targets  are  complemented  by  a  set  of  specific  legally  binding 
objectives in key pieces of legislation for air, noise, water, marine protection and soil as 
well as a number of sources specific EU law (see Annex 1 for details).  

The monitoring framework will provide an assessment for the achievement of the targets 
as well as a regular ‘snapshot’ of the state of environment as regards the key challenges 
caused  by  the  pollution.  It  will  ideally  give  an  answer  to  the  question  of  whether  the 
existing objectives have been achieved and, if not (yet), what the ‘distance to target’ is 
and  in  what  areas  (pollution  types,  sources,  sectors,  countries,…)  pollution  challenges 
remain.  To  this  end,  the  monitoring  will  look  at  the  pollution  situation  at  local  and 
regional level across the EU but focus on the assessment per Member States, the cross-
border dimension of pollution and the EU-wide an inter-continental aspects, to the extent 
possible. For the existing targets (e.g. those listed in Annex 1), a baseline23 or reference 
year against which progress will be measured is already established. However, for other 
pollution types (e.g. soil pollution), this baseline still needs to be established. If possible, 
the aim is to establish such a baseline on the latest available, representative data24 when 
publishing the monitoring part of the first Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook in 
2022.  

Moreover, the planned revision of some laws will look at the updating of the ambition 
level or the widening of the scope in their particular area, which may result in additional 
or  updated  targets  following  an  impact  assessment.  These  updateds  will  have  to  be 
factored into the future iterations of the zero pollution monitoring.  

In  any  case,  the  approach  will  be  iterative  given  the  diversity  and  the  wide  scope  of 
pollution.  In  the  first  round  (2022),  the  approach  will  focus  on  a  limited  number  of 
impacts or pollutants based on readily available data. At the same time, the planning for 
the  next  iteration  (2024)  and  the  identification  for  key  work  areas  to  improve  the 

20   In  particular,  Article  3(2)  Industrial  Emissions  Directive  2010/75/EU,  Article  2  (10)  and  (12)  of  the 
Taxonomy Regulation (EU) 2020/852, point 8 of Article 3 of Directive 2008/56/EC and point 33 of 
Article 2 of Directive 2000/60/EC are the most relevant in this context.  

21   Soil  means the top layer of the Earth’s crust situated between the bedrock and the surface,  which is 
composed of mineral particles, organic matter, water, air and living organisms (see Article 2 (11) of 
Regulation (EU) 2020/852). 

22   COM(2021) 400 
23   Not to be confused with a baseline that represents a business-as-usual scenario in modelling terms.  
24   Annual indicators should ideally have a reference year between 2018-2021 bearing in mind that 2020 
and  maybe  also  2021  will  not  be  representative  in  terms  of  pollution  because  of  the  pandemic. 
However, this needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis.  

5 

 
                                                      
framework at each iteration will be identified. In this context, it will be necessary to fill 
data and knowledge gaps if they are identified as relevant and important for better policy 
making. Administrative burdens can be minimised by using modern digital solutions and 
complementary data sources (e.g. Copernicus25 or citizen science) and applying a more 
modern  data  management  approach  (see  section  6  below).  Guiding  these  developments 
are the established or developing policies for data, namely the European Data Strategy26 
and the one substance, one assessment approach for chemicals, building on the principles 
of openness, transparency and accountability. 

To  guide  these  developments,  a  consultative  process  and  a  regular  review  mechanism 
will  be  foreseen  to  ensure  that  the  developments  are  on  the  right  track  and  are 
coordinated with all relevant actors and initiatives.  

Complementary to this, the outlook part of the Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook 
Report  (also  to  be  published  in  2022  together  with  the  monitoring  report)  will  project 
into the future trend expected if no action is taken (‘baseline’) and compares it with the 
scenarios for a planned or agreed set of measures. It will try to anticipate whether actions 
at  international,  EU,  national,  regional  or  local  level  are  sufficient  to  close  the  “gaps” 
identified  by  the  monitoring.  Already  now,  the  Commission  publishes  a  Clean  Air 
Outlook27,  which  is  complementary  to  the  reports  published  in  the  context  of  the 
Regulation  on  the  Governance  of  the  Energy  Union  and  Climate  Action28.  In  other 
words,  this  framework  and  the  climate  and  energy  reporting  under  the  governance 
regulation are distinct but mutually reinforcing. In addition, work is ongoing to present a 
Clean Water and Marine Outlook in 2022 and outlook work in other areas, such as soil, 
could also be added, once available. The aim is to combine these into an overarching zero 
pollution  outlook  which  can  also  help  to  include  cross-sector  and  cross-media  analysis 
(e.g.  for  nutrients)  and  help  improve  monitoring  consistency  and  streamlining  of 
assessment efforts. The foresight or horizon scanning capacities will also be developed 
(see section 5 for details). 

3.  BACKGROUND  

3.1.  A short history of pollution monitoring  

Pollution was one of the earliest environmental concerns that was addressed by the EU 
(then the European Economic Community-EEC) in 1973 as part of the 1st Environment 
Action Programme29. It was an essential element of European cooperation because of its 
cross-border dimension and its effects on the single market.  In fact, the internal market 
legal  base  was  used  to  regulate  pollution  to  waters  and  air  already  since  the  early 
Seventies  in  order  to  ensure  a  high  level  of  protection  of  the  environment  and  a  level 

25   A wealth of Copernicus information products to monitor the status of the air quality, water and soil are 
provided  for  on  a  full,  free  and  open  basis  by  the  Copernicus  Atmosphere  monitoring  service,  the 
Copernicus  Marine  Environment  Service,  the  Copernicus  Land  Monitoring  service,  the  Copernicus 
Climate Change service, the Copernicus Emergency Management service and the Copernicus Security 
services. 
26   COM(2020) 66 
27   The  first  Clean  Air  Outlook  was  published  in  2018  (COM(2020)  446)  and  the  second  in  2021 

(COM(2021) 3)  

28   COM(2020) 564 and related reports  
29   Declaration  of  the  Council  on  the  programme  of  action  of  the  European  Communities  on  the 

Environment (OJ C112, 20/12/1973, p. 1) 

6 

 
                                                      
playing  field  for  the  economic  operators  who  were  responsible  for  the  pollution.  Even 
before  that,  chemicals  legislation30  was  introduced  which  addressed  the  hazardous 
properties of chemical substances. 

However, pollution did  not  only transfer between countries but also  between  air,  water 
and soil. In 1996, the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive31 was 
an  important  milestone  that  recognised  that  the  protection  of  human  health  and  the 
environment  required a  holistic vision and integrated approach. Since then, pollution is 
defined in EU law32 as:  

‘the  direct  or  indirect  introduction,  as  a  result  of  human  activity,  of  substances, 
vibrations, heat or noise into air, water or land which may be harmful to human health 
or  the  quality  of  the  environment,  result  in  damage  to  material  property,  or  impair  or 
interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment’  
This definition has been largely replicated in many EU laws33, it stood the test of time, 
and now we can build the zero pollution ambition on it.  

The  idea  that  we  need  a  long-term  vision  towards  a  ‘zero  pollution  world’  is  also  not 
new. It was already entertained since the late 1990s when the Ministerial Meeting of the 
North  Sea  countries  and  later  the  OSPAR  Commission  adopted  the  marine  protection 
objective  to  achieve  the  ‘cessation  or  phase  out  of  discharges,  emissions  or  losses  of 
hazardous substances’ until 2020. They realised that through air, water (rivers) and soil 
(sediments), our seas and ocean are becoming the sink (‘dump’)34 of all the pollution that 
enters our environment. This policy drive for marine protection ultimately found its way 
into the Water Framework Directive (WFD)35, influenced the definition of restrictions for 
PBT36  substances  in  the  chemicals  legislation37  and  eventually  in  the  Marine  Strategy 
Framework Directive (MSFD)38.  

Building  on  these,  and  many  other  pieces  of  legislation,  the  EU  has  made  significant 
progress in pollution reduction, which resulted in a number of success stories, e.g.:  

  Bathing and drinking waters is generally of high quality in Europe39; 

  Air pollution, in particular from industry, has been significantly reduced40;   

  Heavy metal pollution in water and air was substantially cut since the 1970s41;  

30   The first rules on classification, labelling and packaging of substances were established by Directive 

67/548/EEC 
31   Directive 96/61/EC 
32   See article 3 (2) of the Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU which is the successor of Directive 

96/61/EC 

33   E.g.  Directive  2000/60/EC  (point  33  of  Article  2),  Directive  2008/56/EC  (point  8  of  Article  3)  or 

Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (points 10 and 12 of Article 2)   
34   And this is not the only sink, soil is also storing a lot of pollution.  
35   See articles 1 (c), 4 (a) (iv) and 16 of Directive 2000/60/EC 
36   persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic 
37   E.g. REACH Regulation 
38    Directive 2008/56/EC, Article 1 and 2b 
39   https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/public-health-and-environmental-protection 
40   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/industry/stationary/ied/evaluation.htm 
41   https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/eea32-heavy-metal-hm-emissions-1/assessment-

10 

7 

 
                                                      
  Many  hazardous  substances  and  pesticides  were  banned  or  their  use  was 

drastically restricted42;  

  Acid rain strongly decreased thanks also to the actions of the EU in the frame of 

the UNECE Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution. 

Nevertheless,  some  of  the  most  pressing  pollution  issues  at  the  time  are  solved,  other 
persisted and proved more difficult to tackle. In particular, nutrient pollution was causing 
huge environment and health impacts (e.g. through eutrophication effects such as ‘dead 
zones’) already 50 years ago and we cannot claim that the situation has much improved 
despite  various  directives  in  place  (nitrates,  sewage  sludge,  urban  waste  water,  air 
emission  ceilings,  etc.),  in  particular  in  some  marine  areas.  In  addition,  new  pollution 
issues  emerged  that  we  were  either  not  aware  of  (e.g.  in  relation  to  PFAS, 
pharmaceuticals, or the transition of particulate from some sources to nano-level sizes) or 
that we underestimated, such as the marine pollution from plastics, as well as the aquatic 
and  terrestrial  pollution  from  microplastics.  Moreover,  combined  effects  of  all  types  of 
pollution mixtures turned out to be of a far greater concern to our health and environment 
than just looking at the individual substance. In addition, the pollution is not emitted into 
a  pristine  environment,  but  added  to  chemicals  and  effects  on  health  that  have 
accumulated over time due to human activities. 

It is therefore high time to define a ‘zero pollution world’ that we want to live in, and to 
aspire to move in this direction as quickly as we can, with ingenuity and creativity. The 
zero  pollution  ambition for  a  toxic  free  environment  does  exactly  that43. Consequently, 
we also need to agree on how to measure whether we have reached our policy objectives, 
and  to  modernise  and  integrate  our  existing  monitoring  and  outlook  frameworks 
accordingly. This will help guide us and measure the progress towards achieving the zero 
pollution ambition.  

42   E.g. SWD(2020) 87 
43   COM(2021) 400 

8 

 
 
 
 
                                                      
Feedback from the online public consultation on monitoring44  
The open public consultation for the preparation of the Zero Pollution  Action Plan included an 
expert section on the pollution monitoring frameworks. Overall,  the  majority  of  respondents  
(50%  or  more)  completely  or  somewhat  agree with  the  statements relating  to the  needed 
improvements    of  the    various    aspects    to  pollution    policies.  58%  of    the    respondents 
completely agree  that  linkages of  health data with pollution data need to improved, while just 
over  a  third  of  the  respondents  (33%)    consider    the    existing  monitoring  frameworks    for  
pollution at  the  EU  and national level to be sufficient (see figure below). With respect to the 
opinions of respondents on the main purpose for a zero pollution monitoring  and  outlook  at  EU  
level,  60%  or  more  somewhat  agree  with  all  of  the suggested  options. Respondents  seem  
most  uncertain about the “being  'a  driver  for change'  through  better  communication  with  
and  engagement  of  citizens” option, where 23% answered that they neither disagree nor agree. 
With  respect  to  the  pollutants  that  should  be  addressed  as  a  priority  at  EU  level  and  therefore  
included   in   the    monitoring    framework,    60%   or   more    of    the   respondents  completely  or 
somewhat  agree  with  the  listed  categories  of  pollution,  except  the  two  options  related  to  other 
pollution  not  listed.  Pesticides  /  biocides  are  ranked  first  with  72%    of    the    respondents  
completely    agreeing  they    should    be  addressed    as    a    priority,  followed    by    marine    litter  
(68%),    heavy    metals  (64%),    pharmaceuticals    (62%),    and  particulate    matter    (62%). 
Respondents are less certain about addressing noise as a priority, where 20% of the respondents 
neither disagree nor agree. Overall, 71% of respondents fully or somewhat agree that ‘developing 
an overarching MF at EU level is relevant for their work’. 

44   Ecorys (2021): “Consultations on the EU Action Plan towards a zero pollution ambition for air, water 

and soil”, Synopsis Report (see ‘Have your say’ portal’). 

9 

 
 
 
                                                      
3.2.  Achievement and challenges of existing pollution monitoring  

Pollution monitoring is as old as the EU’s pollution control policy. It is probably one of 
the most comprehensive and advanced sources for the evidence base that we have in the 
various  environmental  domains.  For  instance,  EU  air  quality  and  bathing  water 
monitoring  regularly  features  in  the  news  and  its  annual  reports  by  the  European 
Environment  Agency  generate  a  high  interest  and  visibility  indicating  the  continued 
interest and concern in such issues by the public and policymakers.  

The  main  source  of  EU  level  data  and  information  stems  from  legal  obligations  in 
environmental  laws.  The  Fitness  Check  of  environmental  monitoring  and  reporting45 
provided, for the first time, a comprehensive overview of these monitoring and reporting 
based  on  environment  legislation.  Sixty-four  pieces  of  legislation  were  analysed  which 
include  a  total  of  181  reporting  obligations.  Approximately  20%  of  these  obligations 
include  data  and  information  on  pollution,  ranging  from  concentrations  in  the 
environment, exceedances of limit values to sources of pollution or measures to tackle it. 
In  addition,  Commission  services46  and  various  EU  agencies47    are  collecting  relevant 
information either on specific legal basis or on a voluntary basis. Furthermore, projects 
from  different  EU programmes have provided  ad hoc input to the evidence base. More 
recently, citizen’s science has become an increasingly relevant source of complementary 
information/knowledge48.  Approximately  220  pollution  related  indicators  have  been 
counted as those being  used in one or the other EU policy context,  although the actual 
number  is  likely  to  be  higher.  It  is  important  to  note  that  certain  aspects  such  as  the 
monitoring  of  soil  pollution  are  mainly  covered  at  national  level,  which  results  in 
different approaches, methodologies and gaps.  

As a result, some very successful monitoring products are published, like e.g.:  

  The  European  Air  Quality  Index  and  the  regular  Air  Quality  Reports  of  the 

EEA49; 

  The annual EEA Bathing Water Report50; 

  The European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR)51;  

There  are  many  other  implementation  reports  on  all  pollution-related  legislation.  In 
addition,  information  systems  collect,  disseminate  and  share  pollution  related  data,  e.g. 
the  regionally  aggregated  data  on  heavy  metals,  pesticide  residues  and  nutrients  in  EU 
soils  (LUCAS  Soils)  or  chemical  monitoring  data  in  all  media  (environment,  humans, 
food/feed  and  products)  in  the  Information  Platform  on  Chemical  Monitoring 
(IPCHEM), to  name just a few.  Also the THETIS-EU52 platform to  monitor and report 
implementation  of  environmental  laws  applicable  to  maritime  transport  is  a  good 

45   SWD(2017) 230 
46   Including  Eurostat,  the  Joint  Research  Centre  and  the  services  working  with  the  Copernicus 

programme 

47   Including  the  European  Environment  Agency  (EEA),  the  European  Chemicals  Agency  (ECHA),  the 

European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) 

48   SWD(2020) 149 
49   https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/air/air-quality-index/index 
50    https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/europes-seas-and-coasts/assessments/state-of-bathing-water 
51   https://prtr.eea.europa.eu/ 
52  https://portal.emsa.europa.eu/web/thetis-eu  described 

the  European  Maritime  Transport 

in 

Environmental report  

10 

 
                                                      
example  for  a  successful  information  system.  It  combines  record  and  exchange 
information with compliance and verifications efforts.  

Complementary  to  national  and  specific  monitoring,  the  Commission  Copernicus  earth 
observation  Programme  operational  since  2014  operates  dedicated  full,  free  and  open 
data  and  information  services  for  environmental  monitoring  of  planet  health.  The 
atmosphere monitoring service, the marine environment monitoring service, the maritime 
surveillance  service  are  delivering  daily  routine  observation  of  some  pollutants  and 
offering in  some cases  forecasts of such pollutants.  The atmosphere monitoring service 
delivers  observations  to  contribute  to  the  air  quality  reporting53.  These  observation  are 
fully,  freely  and  openly  available  and  are  advantageously  harmonised  and  quality-
controlled  across  countries  at  pan-European  level  and  at  global  scale.  Reporting  and 
analysis are published annually for example through the Copernicus ocean state report54 
(monthly ocean monitoring indicators). Data are made openly and digitally available for 
additional analysis in  support to  policies implementation.As regards to  forward-looking 
outlooks, the situation is somewhat less advanced. Similar to the projections of climate 
policy,  the  regular  Clean  Air  Outlook55  provides  a  perspective  on  air  emission  trends 
based on a number of scenarios, which allows for a discussion on the most effective way 
to achieve our EU air quality objectives. As for other pollution aspects, work is ongoing, 
in particular in relation to water and marine pollution (see section 5).  

Despite  this  impressive  and  comprehensive  evidence  base,  there  are  still  shortcomings 
which  prevent  a  more  robust  basis  for  policy  evaluations  and  impact  assessment.  The 
following  findings  feature  regularly  in  the  Commission’s  REFIT  evaluations,  in 
particular:  

  Data  are  incomplete,  are  not  monitored  and/or  reported  by  Member  States  or 

information is late or outdated;  

  The quality of the data varies and lacks comparability; 

  The  frequency  of  data  collection  or  transmission  is  not  adequate  for  policy 

indicators (which are needed on an annual or, at least, biannual basis);  

  The granularity (disaggregation of parameters or geographic levels, e.g. regional) 

is not sufficient to allow meaningful policy analysis; 

  The format and structure of monitored/reported data makes it time consuming to 

aggregate and integrate them;  

  The  access  to  the  data  is  difficult  or  restrictions  hinder  their  use  for  different 

purposes, in particular from (past) research projects; 

  Data are not well documented or difficult to interpret and re-use;   

  Data are not easily findable, accessible and interoperable; 

  For emerging pollution issues, it is often difficult to get robust, EU-wide data;  

53 

https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/copernicus-contributes-european-environment-agencys-2020-air-

quality-europe-report 

54   https://marine.copernicus.eu/access-data/ocean-state-report  and  https://marine.copernicus.eu/access-

data/ocean-monitoring-indicators 

55   Second Clean Air Outlook: COM(2021) 3 

11 

 
                                                      
  There is multiple reporting and collection of the same data and they do not benefit 

from technological progress in digital technologies; 

  Data cannot be reused for other purposes. 

Moreover,  there  is  no  thematic  overview  on  pollution  that  brings  all  these  individual 
pieces of information together and provides for an integrated picture. This is reflected in 
the lack of indicators for the combined exposure to  mixtures of chemicals,  and of their 
impact on human and ecosystem health.  

3.3.  Other existing and foreseen policy monitoring frameworks 

In  addition  to  the  thematic  monitoring  described  above,  there  are  a  number  of 
overarching monitoring frameworks including the pollution dimension, either existing or 
under  development.  The  efforts  towards  a  zero  pollution  monitoring  and  outlook 
framework  are  directed  towards  using  what  exists  and  contributing  to  improving  the 
deficiencies  in  the  current  frameworks.  This  section  provides  a  short,  non-exhaustive 
overview  on  the  most  relevant  wider  EU  monitoring  frameworks  and  the  relationship 
with the one on zero pollution.  

Monitoring sustainable development goals (SDGs)  

The Commission (Eurostat) publishes annually a monitoring report on progress towards 
the SDGs in an EU context56. Currently, the report includes a number of pollution-related 
indicators.  In  total,  eight  out  of  the  100  indicators  are  used  for  directly  monitoring 
pollution (some of them to monitor two Goals) under the SDGs 6 (water pollution), 11 
(air  and  noise  pollution),  12  (toxic  chemicals),  14  (marine  pollution)  and  15  (water 
pollution  affecting  terrestrial  ecosystems).  In  addition  also  indicators  for  the  SDGs  3 
(health)  or  7  (energy)  are  relevant.  These  indicators  are  currently  the  best  indicators 
available  for  the  purposes  of  SDG  monitoring  however  there  is  still  scope  to  more 
comprehensively cover some important pollution aspects (e.g. in case of indicators used 
for SDGs 3, 12, 14 and 15). The zero pollution monitoring framework can help identify 
and develop further indicators to complement those that already exist.  

The EEA’s report on ‘The European Environment: State and Outlook’ (SOER) 

The flagship report of the European Environment Agency presents the latest knowledge 
and data on the environment in Europe every five years57. The overview dashboard (table 
ES1 in the 2020 edition of the report) contains 35 themes out of which 14 assessments of 
the  past  trends  and  outlook  are  pollution-related.  Looking  at  the  detailed  maps  and 
indicators,  approximately  30  are  used  throughout  the  report.  Together,  they  already 
provide a very comprehensive overview.  

Furthermore, the EEA possess additional information and data which are also published 
as part of both thematic-specific reports, as well as cross-cutting reports, e.g. recently on 
the ‘Healthy Environment, Healthy Lives’ report58. There remain, however, opportunities 
to further integrate pollution-related issues and in the future to ensure its relevance to the 
European  Green  Deal.  Some  of  the  ‘shortcomings’  are  also  linked  to  the  overall 

56   https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-statistical-books/-/KS-02-20-202 
57   https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer 
58   EEA Report 21/2019 

12 

 
 
                                                      
shortcomings in the EU’s environmental monitoring and reporting system (as identified, 
e.g.  in  the  Commission’s  Fitness  Check59  and  in  the  Chemicals  Strategy  for 
Sustainability60), e.g. the lack of robust and reliable data and indicators on environmental 
status  and  impacts  for  certain  issues  such  as  the  impact  of  chemicals  and  chemical 
mixtures  on  health  and  the  environment,  soil  pollution  and  the  better  use  of  modern 
technologies to complement traditional reporting of information by Member States.  

The Zero Pollution framework can help address these shortcomings and assist the EEA’s 
efforts  to  further  develop  their  evidence  base  and  aligning  it  with  the  zero  pollution 
ambition  in  the  European  Green  Deal.  Hence,  all  efforts  will  be  done  in  close 
collaboration  with  the  EEA  and  the  EIONET61  network  of  European  countries  so  that 
these developments can also benefit the preparation of the next SOER.  
Measuring progress towards the 8th Environment Action Programme objectives  

The  Commission’s  proposal  for  an  8th  Environment  Action  Programme  (8th  EAP)62 
includes  a  provision  on  measuring  progress  (Article  4).  This  provision  will  trigger  an 
overarching discussion on developing an 'umbrella' monitoring framework that builds on 
specific  work  streams  to  monitor  environmental  priorities,  such  as  circular  economy 
biodiversity protection and the zero pollution ambition. The aim is to provide coherence 
between different monitoring exercises by selecting a limited number of key high-level 
indicators that are most appropriate for the purpose of strategic communication towards 
the EU’s 2030 and 2050 environment and climate goals. The work on the zero pollution 
monitoring and outlook framework is closely coordinated with the 8th EAP work and the 
aim is to achieve a fully coherent and integrated outcome, e.g. in terms of approach and 
indicators63.  

Meeting the objectives of EU environmental laws and policies: the overview provided by 
the Environmental Implementation Review  

The  Commission  and  the  Member  States  must  ensure  that  environmental  policies  and 
legislation  are  enforced  and  deliver  effectively.  The  Environmental  Implementation 
Review (EIR) maps the performance of each Member State. To date, two Environmental 
Implementation reviews (EIR) have been carried out in 2017 and 2019. The next review, 
due in 2022, is expected to highlight further actions required from each Member State in 
order to make sure that the EU remains on track to meet its environmental objectives. In 
accordance with the mandate given by the European Green Deal  Investment Plan64, the 
EIR will also identify the investment needs of each Member State in the key sectors of 
environmental  policy  and  practice.  The  zero  pollution  monitoring  will  generate  a 
comprehensive set of data, indicators and assessments that can help inform the next EIR.  

59   COM(2017)312 and SWD(2017)230 
60   COM(2020) 667 final 
61  European Environment Information and Observation Network 
62   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/environment-action-programme-2030_en 
63   Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8th EAP monitoring framework 
64   COM(2020) 21 

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                      
Monitoring under thematic strategies 

  Circular Economy 

The monitoring framework developed as part of the first Circular Economy Action Plan 
is an inspiration for an integrated and policy-relevant approach. It identified 10 headline 
indicators (with 23 sub-indicators) which describe the economic cycle from production, 
consumption, waste management to secondary raw materials as well as competitiveness 
and innovation. This concept is a useful example to illustrate how complex relationships 
and  systemic  challenges  can  be  captured  with  a  relatively  small  number  of  indicators. 
However,  it  does  not  include  any  pollution  related  indicators  although  the  release  of 
emissions to air, water or soil is one sign of an inefficient economy where resources are 
wasted  at  the  expense  of  affecting  our  health  or  our  ecosystems.  The  new  Circular 
Economy  Action  Plan  announces  a  revision  of  the  monitoring  framework,  with  new 
indicators  that  will  take  account  of  the  focus  areas  in  the  action  plan  and  of  the 
interlinkages between circularity, climate neutrality and the zero pollution ambition. The 
zero  pollution  monitoring  framework  can  therefore  complement  the  existing  indicators 
and  this  ambition  with  a  measure  on  how  clean  we  can  develop  our  circular  economy. 
Coherence  between  the  monitoring  frameworks  will  be  ensured  to,      support  this 
transition towards a cleaner, climate-neutral, circular economy by 2050. 

  Biodiversity 

Section  2.2.9  of  the  Biodiversity  Strategy65  sets  out  the  ambition  level  and  actions  for 
reducing pollution in relation to the objectives of that Strategy:  

“Pollution  is  a  key  driver  of  biodiversity  loss  and  has  a  harmful  impact  on  our  health 
and environment. While the EU has a solid legal framework in place to reduce pollution, 
greater efforts are still required. Biodiversity is  suffering  from the release of  nutrients, 
chemical  pesticides,  pharmaceuticals,  hazardous  chemicals,  urban  and  industrial 
wastewater, and other waste including litter and plastics. All of these pressures must be 
reduced.  […]      The  Commission  will  develop  a  set  of  indicators  for  the  progressive 
reduction of  pollution, and will establish baselines to  help  monitor progress.  Pressures 
from marine litter and underwater noise are being addressed under the Marine Strategy 
Framework Directive.” 

The zero pollution monitoring framework will help  implement  this action. At the same 
time,  there  are  ongoing  discussions  on  biodiversity  targets  and  monitoring  under 
Convention  for  Biological  Diversity  (CBD)66  which  include  pollution  aspects.  These 
discussions build on the IPBES global assessment67 and the IPBES regional assessment 
report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia (ECA)68 and 
other work in the area of biodiversity and ecosystem assessment69. The aim is to ensure 
consistency and synergies between the biodiversity and zero pollution efforts, which then 
can also help for the monitoring under the 8th EAP. To achieve this, further work will be 
needed to align conceptual approaches and coordinate the variety of ongoing processes. 

65   COM(2020) 380 
66   see  pollution-related  proposals  in  recent  SBSTTA-24  document  or  the  UNEP  thought  starter  on  the 

linkages between biodiversity and chemicals & waste/ pollution 

67   https://ipbes.net/global-assessment  
68   https://ipbes.net/assessment-reports/eca 
69    E.g. State of knowledge of soil biodiversity - Status, challenges and potentialities 

14 

 
                                                      
As  foreseen  in  the  Biodiversity  Strategy  for  2030,  the  Commission  will also  revise  the 
Soil  Thematic Strategy  and  address  soil  degradation  due  to  pollution  as  one  of  the  key 
pressures  affecting  ecosystem  services  including  the  capacity  of  soil  to  function  as  a 
habitat.  

  Farm to Fork  

The  Farm  to  Fork  Strategy70  sets  a  number  of  important  high-level  targets  that  will 
contribute  to  reduce  pollution  (some  of  them  being  common  with  the  Biodiversity 
Strategy), namely from nutrients, pesticides and substances with associated antimicrobial 
resistance. Monitoring of these targets will be achieved through indicators, which reflect 
the use of these products or, in case of fertilisers, the nutrient balance. These indicators 
will be an important component of the zero pollution monitoring, but they will not give 
an indication in how far the reduction of use results in concentrations in air, water or soil, 
which  do  not  cause  harm  to  human  health  or  the  environment.  The  zero  pollution 
monitoring can inform about these aspects and add to the efforts towards achieving the 
agreed goals.   

  Bioeconomy 

The  EU  Bioeconomy  Monitoring  System71,  pursuant  to  the  EU  Bioeconomy  Strategy 
Action Plan72 monitors progress towards the EU Bioeconomy Strategy Objectives at both 
EU and Member State level:  

  Ensuring food and nutrition security;  

  Managing Natural Resources Sustainably;  

  Reducing dependence on non-renewable unsustainable resources, whether 

sourced domestically or from abroad;  

  Mitigating and adapting to climate change;  

  Strengthening European competitiveness and creating jobs.    

It  builds  on  existing  data  from  official  sources,  thus  limiting  administrative  burden  on 
countries.  The  monitoring  system's  conceptual  framework 
is  compatible  with 
International  Bioeconomy  Monitoring  Guidelines  and  cuts  across  the  five  objectives  of 
the  EU  Bioeconomy  Strategy,  the  three  dimensions  of  sustainability  (environment, 
society and economy) and the steps of the value chain, from the underlying ecosystems to 
primary production systems, to production, uses and end-of-life. Each indicator in the EU 
Bioeconomy  Monitoring  System  is  mapped  to  Green  Deal  Priorities.  Those  that  are 
mapped  to  the  '  a  zero  pollution  ambition  for  a  toxic-free  environment'  priority  are 
relating to quality of life in urban areas and the indicator 'environmental impacts’ based 
on  product-based  life-cycle  assessment  (LCA)  and  basket  of  representative  products  of 
the  bioeconomy.  Although  pollution  is  not  a  major  focus  of  the  EU  Bioeconomy 
Monitoring  System,  it  does  contain  indicators  about  air  and  water  quality  under  the 
heading of ecosystem services. 

70   COM(2020) 381 
71   https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/bioeconomy/monitoring_en 
72   COM(2018) 673 

15 

 
                                                      
  Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability 

The  Chemicals  Strategy  for  Sustainability73,  in  line  with  the  European  Green  Deal, 
strives  for  a  toxic-free  environment,  where  chemicals  are  produced  and  used  in  a  way 
that  maximises  their  contribution  to  society  including  achieving  the  green  and  digital 
transition, while avoiding harm to the planet and to current and future generations. The 
strategy sets actions to ensure that all chemicals are used more safely and sustainably, to 
promote that chemicals having a chronic effect for human health and the environment  - 
substances of concern74 – are minimised and substituted as far as possible, and to phase 
out  the  most  harmful  ones  for  non-essential  societal  use,  in  particular  in  consumer 
products. The industrial transition towards the production and use of safe and sustainable 
chemicals a key requisite to achieve a toxic-free environment. 

Notwithstanding  the  EU's  world-class  knowledge  on  chemicals'  properties  and  risks, 
there is room for improving the knowledgeon the intrinsic properties of a vast majority of 
chemicals, and knowledge on uses of hazardous chemicals and exposure of humans and 
the  environment  is  fragmented.  The  Strategy  recognises  the  importance  of  further 
improving  the  scientific  understanding  of  the  impacts  of  chemicals  on  health  and  the 
environment,  including  by  monitoring  the  presence  of  chemicals  in  humans  and 
ecosystems. The Strategy announces that a framework of indicators will be developed, as 
part of a wider zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework, in the context of the 8th 
Environment  Action  Programme,  to  monitor  the  drivers  and  impacts  of  chemical 
pollution and to measure the effectiveness of chemicals legislation. The Commission will 
also establish Key Performance Indicators to measure the industrial transition towards the 
production of safe and sustainable chemicals.   

In addition, the Strategy – as part of the ‘one substance, one assessment’ approach – sets 
out a number of important actions in relation to chemical monitoring data, in particular:  

  making  all  chemical  monitoring  data  available  via  the  Information  Platform  for 
Chemical Monitoring to ensure their findability, accessibility and interoperability; 

  making a legislative proposal to  removing legislative obstacles for the re-use of 
data and better streamlining the flow of chemical data between EU and national 
authorities; 

  extending the principle of open data and the relevant transparency principles from 
the EU food safety sector to other pieces of legislation dealing with chemicals; 

 

rationalising the use of expertise and resources by proposing the reattribution of 
technical and scientific work on chemicals performed under the relevant pieces of 
legislation  to  European  agencies,  including  work  of  the  relevant  scientific 
committees;  

  enabling  EU  and  national  authorities  to  commission  testing  and  monitoring  of 
substances  as  part  of  the  regulatory  framework  when  further  information  is 
considered necessary. 

73   COM(2020) 667 
74   These include substances having a chronic effect for human health or the environment (Candidate list 
in REACH and Annex VI to the CLP Regulation) but also those which hamper recycling for safe and 
high quality secondary raw materials. 

16 

 
                                                      
Further, the toxicity and use data on chemicals will be consolideted across Agencies and 
made availbale for re-use through the open data portal on chemicals. Developing a zero 
pollution monitoring will rely strongly on the successful implementation of these actions. 
Close coordination with these efforts will be necessary.  

Comparison of these existing monitoring frameworks  

The  purpose  and  structure  of  these  various  monitoring  frameworks  is  different  and 
therefore it is not surprising that the number and type of indicator varies.  For example, 
the Green City Accord is working to  building on forward indicators for cities to  assess 
their  progress  in  five  environmental  areas.  However,  when  extracting  the  pollution-
related parts of the analysis, it may give the impression that the situation and progress is 
somewhat different depending on which framework you look at. For example, Eurostat’s 
SDG monitoring indicates a positive or very positive trend for all pollution parameters, 
the EEA’s SOER gives a much bleaker picture with a mix or negative outlook putting in 
doubt  that  many  pollution  related  policy  objectives  will  be  met.  These  apparently 
different  findings  are  the  result  of  methodological  choices  and  availability  of  relevant 
data which in themselves are perfectly logic and justifiable but not necessarily helpful in 
the  EU’s  policy  debates.  The  zero  pollution  monitoring  framework  will  not  be  able  to 
resolve  all  these  divergences  but  may  help  to  create  a  common  reference  point,  a 
platform for coordination and a process towards convergence. 

4.  ZERO POLLUTION MONITORING 

4.1.  Concept 

The monitoring framework can draw lessons from many past and ongoing initiatives that 
develop a similar concept for an overarching policy. In particular, the climate monitoring 
mechanism75,  the  Circular  Economy  monitoring76  or  the  Digital  Economy  and  Society 
Index  (DESI)77  have  been  sources  of  inspiration.  Amongst  the  existing  pollution 
monitoring frameworks, probably the one for air policy is most advanced but many other 
areas can also provide lessons for this overarching approach.  

Monitoring  pollution  can  be  organised  in  several  layers  and  dimensions  given  the 
large  number  of  pollutants,  sources  and  endpoints  (i.e.  affecting  different  aspects  of 
health  or  the  environment).  To  this  end,  the  hierarchy  set  out  in  the  pyramid  below 
(figure 1) is showing the different levels of granularity of monitoring frameworks. 

75   https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/progress/monitoring_en 
76   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/first_circular_economy_action_plan.html 
77   https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi 

17 

 
                                                      
Figure 1:  Pyramid of levels for different degree of granularity of a monitoring framework based 
on indicators, with the 8th EAP monitoring (under development) as an "umbrella framework".78  

The  headline  set  of  indicators  for  zero  pollution  feeding  into  the  8th  Environment 
Action  Programme  monitoring  should  not  exceed  a  small  number  of  indicators  for 
pollution.  These  few  indicators  should  merely  provide  a  sense  of  the  scale  of  the 
pollution problems that need to be solved. In addition, the ambition is to start building a 
zero  pollution  monitoring  and  outlook  framework  on  the  available  data  and  evidence 
which  provides  a  more  comprehensive,  yet  succinct  and  integrated  overview  and 
monitoring of progress for the zero pollution ambition. A more detailed and specific set 
of  indicators  and  assessment  is  needed  for  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of 
legislation  and  yet  more  indicators  are  emerging  from  research.  All  of  these  different 
levels of granularity need to be interconnected and logically built on one another.  

A conceptual representation for the zero pollution monitoring framework is set out 
in  figure  2.  This  illustration  looks  at  the  concept  more  from  the  perspective  of  the 
‘receptor’,  such  as  humans,  biota  or  various  environmental  media.  The  systemic 
perspective  of  the  sources  and  pressures  (pollution  levels)  is  discussed  in  chapter  4.3. 
Moreover,  the  economic  and  social  dimension,  including  the  possible  impacts  of 
pollution on vulnerable groups or productivity, is desirable to assess.    

The  identification  and  monitoring  of  key  impacts  (or  causing  harm)  on  health  and  the 
environment are a central element in assessing progress towards achieving the vision for 
the zero pollution ambition by 2050.  Based on this overarching conceptual approach, a 
set of initial impact indicator has been proposed in Annex 2 as a starting point to identify 
the best indicators for strategic communication as set out above.  

78   Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8th EAP monitoring framework 

18 

 
 
 
                                                      
Figure 2: Conceptual representation of the Zero Pollution Monitoring Framework 

There is certainly no shortage of indicators and the existing indicator libraries79 can be a 
starting point for discussion. However, it is likely that new indicators may also need to be 
developed. The selection of indicators will be based on a clear set of criteria, which uses 
best  available  data  in  the  context  of  the  policy  objective  that  is  being  monitored  (see 
Annex 2).  

  They should cover the scope of the zero pollution ambition as set out in the Green 
Deal,  i.e. address  air/noise, water/marine, soil  and consumer  products, when 
possible.  For  each  of  these  four  categories,  the  most  relevant  ones  should  be 
identified  on  the  basis  on  either  impact  (harm)  for  human  health  or  impact 
(harm)  for  biodiversity  and  ecosystems.  A  mechanism  to  identifying  the 
pollutants with the highest impacts will need to be discussed80.  

  The  most  important  pollutant  pressures  (or  emissions)  to  air,  water  and  soil 

should be identified.  

  Some  important  emerging  pollutants  should  be  added,  again  differentiated  by 

air, water and soil, if possible.  

  A  number  of  general  quality  criteria  need  to  be  fulfilled,  such  as  timelines, 
regularity  and  the  ‘RACER’  (relevance,  acceptability,  credibility,  easiness  and 
robustness)81 criteria (see Annex 2 for details).  

The  selection  of  indicators  can  be  based  on  the  approximately  200  available  pollution 
indicators  at  EU  level.  This  document  makes  a  number  of  suggestions  and  identifies 
possible indicators. The rationale for this selection is  set  out  in the subsequent  sections 
and  proposed  initial  indicators  based  on  the  available,  most  relevant  ones  has  been 

79   https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/environment/environmental-indicator-catalogue 
80   E.g.  building  on  examples  and  experiences  from  international  organisations  (e.g.  WHO  and  IPBES) 

and relevant research (e.g. Lancet Commission on pollution and health).  

81   See Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool#41 

19 

 
 
 
                                                      
included  in  Annex  2.  However,  the  final  selection  will  only  be  done  later  in  2021 
following  a  consultation  and  after  the  work  on  the  8th  EAP  monitoring  are  more 
advanced.  

At the same time, the weaknesses and shortcomings of the initial indicator set should be 
considered  from  the  outset  in  order  to  identify  actions  that  will  improve  existing  or 
develop new indicators to fit the political need. As a result, Annex 3 provides the starting 
point for developing a work programme that will start in 2021 with the aim of delivering 
improvements to support the 2024 update of zero pollution monitoring. 

The  indicators  identified  for  the  zero  pollution  monitoring  may  be  complement  with 
qualitative analyses derived from available data that may be limited in terms of temporal 
and geographical coverage. Dimensions that could be covered by qualitative case studies 
include  for  example  indoor  air  pollution,  light  pollution  or  soil  pollution  and  the 
integrated impacts of pollution on human and ecosystems health. 

The  current  set  of  indicators  may  only  address  certain  pollution  types,  pathways  or 
sources. Ideally, more integrated environmental impact indicators should be used such as 
the total pollution exposure level on human health, the reduction of human sperm quality 
or  the  decline  in  insects  or  pollinators  (see  section  4.5).  Such  integrated,  composite 
indicators  already  exist  to  a  certain  extent  for  certain  types  of  ecosystems  (e.g.  good 
status as set out below) but they are often not only affected by pollution but also by other 
pressures.  Further  work  may  be  needed  to  develop  such  integrated  or  composite 
indicators (see section 7).  

It  is  clear  that  the  conceptual  framework  will  need  to  evolve  with  time.  Indeed,  the 
ongoing  efforts to  standardize natural capital  accounting practices at corporate, project, 
and  government  level  as  well  as  the  related  reporting  and  disclosure  schemes  that  are 
being  developed  in  the  context  of  greening  the  capital  markets  union  could  provide 
valuable contributions which can be integrated in time.  

Finally,  the  aim  is  not  to  increase  the  administrative  burden  or  to  keep  it  limited  for 
Member  States  or  even,  after  some  initial  investment  (e.g.  in  digital  technology, 
modelling or processes), to reduce it. At the same time, the weaknesses and shortcomings 
should  be  identified  and  a  gradual  process  for  improvement  is  started  against  an 
overarching  and  common  ambition  level.  Where  observational  monitoring  data  are 
insufficient  or  not  available,  a  cost-effective  way  is  to  use  modelling  to  interpolate  or 
extrapolate on the basis of the available monitoring results82. This aspect is not explored 
further  here,  but  it  is  an  area  where  digital  solutions  can  help  (e.g.  big  data,  artificial 
intelligence, remote sensing, earth system modelling)83.   

This  will  require  some  additional  investments,  in  particular  initially,  but  it  will  be 
assessed  against  the  benefits  that  it  results  in,  or  synergies  with  other  policies  like 
climate. In many cases, such investment will be part of improvements of implementation 
because many data gaps are a result of incomplete implementation of existing provisions. 
This  can  create  synergies  and  new  opportunities,  e.g.  by  introducing  better  use  of 
available space-based earth observation data and more advance digital technologies and 
processes.   

82   E.g. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.15504 or 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-00324-3 

83   See SWD (2021) 140 

20 

 
                                                      
4.2.  Monitoring key impacts / harm 

Based  on  available  indicators  linked  to  air,  water  and  soil,  there  are  two  important 
impacts that the monitoring framework needs to capture:  

1.  key  pathways  through  which  air,  water  (e.g.  through  drinking  water  or  bathing 
water)  or  soil  as  well  as  food  and  product  pollution  affect  our  daily  lives  and 
thereby our health (‘environmental health & wellbeing indicators’); 

2.  the  wider  impact  of  pollution  (and  other  pressures)  on  our  surface  and  ground 

waters, marine and land ecosystems (‘planetary boundaries indicators’).  

4.2.1.  Pollution, human health and well-being 

The  most  relevant  known  impacts  on  human  health  result  from  air,  noise  and  water 
pollution as well as through consumer products. This is encapsulated by SDG 3.9 targets 
which  aim  at  the  substantial  reduction  in  the  number  of  deaths  and  illnesses  from 
hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination. 

For impacts from air pollution, the relevant indicators (e.g. on Years of Life Lived with 
Disability or Lost (YLD- YLL) and/or premature deaths) are already widely used. 

In  addition,  the  impact  of  noise  pollution  on  human  health  has  been  widely  proven, 
with  a  range  of  indicators  available  to  measure  and  communicate  impacts  on  health84. 
Detailed data on citizens’ exposure and health effects are available at the level of the EU 
but  because  of  their  complexity  they  are  only  updated  every  five  years.  Similarly,  data 
from several water-related directives provide an additional insight to the potential effects 
of noise pollution on human health and wellbeing but they are only collected every four 
to six years. These initially proposed indicators can be used for a wider assessment and 
will,  as  far  as  possible,  be  included  in  the  ‘baseline’  for  the  first  zero  pollution 
monitoring report. Some of them could be included in other monitoring frameworks (see 
chapter  3.3)  because  these  data  are  collected  more  regularly  by  Member  States  but 
currently not transmitted annually to the EU level.  

As  regards  water,  the  water-related  Sustainable  Development  Goal  (SDG6)  puts 
emphasis on the access to safe drinking water and sanitation, which are globally still 
affecting  health  conditions  (e.g.  compliance  with  drinking  water  standards).  Data  for 
these  indicators  are,  in  theory,  available  on  an  annual  or  biannual  basis  but  further 
arrangements  with  the  Member  States  are  needed  (in  particular  on  water  indicators)  to 
ensure that the aggregated indicators can be published annually. 

Moreover, the impact of chemicals through products including food (in addition to the 
exposure  of  the  same  chemicals  through  air,  water  or  soil)  is  relevant  but  difficult  to 
quantify given the large variety of chemicals and products. The same is true for air, water 
or soil. For instance, there is a variety of water masses with different spatial / temporal 
conditions, as well as a variety of chemicals to quantify. Work is ongoing in the context 
of  developing  indicators  for  the  Chemicals  Strategy.  Other  indicators  may  also  be 
discussed (e.g. contaminants in seafood or soil pollution and health) but would need to be 
at the same level of relevance, importance and availability as the above-mentioned ones.  

84   Health risks caused by environmental noise in Europe — European Environment Agency (europa.eu); 

Environmental noise in Europe — 2020 — European Environment Agency (europa.eu) 

21 

 
                                                      
When  using  and  assessing  these  indicators,  it  will  be  important  to  also  analyse  the 
exposure  of  such  pollution  to  different  population  groups.  This  can  be  achieved  by 
disaggregating  the  pollution  levels  data  (as  well  as  measuring  key  pressures)  not  only 
along  geographic  criteria but  also  by population groups, including according to  income 
distribution85. 

4.2.2.  Pollution, ecosystems and planetary boundaries  

The SDGs set out a number of targets linked to pollution, e.g.: 

  By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and 
minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion 
of  untreated  wastewater  and  substantially  increasing  recycling  and  safe  reuse 
globally (SDG target 6.3). 

  By  2025,  prevent  and  significantly  reduce  marine  pollution  of  all  kinds,  in 
particular  from  land-based  activities,  including  marine  debris  and  nutrient 
pollution (SDG 14.1); 

Many indicators describing the pollution impacts on the environment and ecosystems are 
available but many are not collected or updated on an annual basis.  

On water and marine ecosystems, data are transferred to the EU level under the WFD 
and  MSFD  every  six  years.  They  are  reported  into  the  Water  Information  System  for 
Europe  (WISE  and  WISE-Marine),  mostly  as  “compliance”  or  “failure”  (with  some 
additional information), but the underlying data are not. Some monthly ocean monitoring 
data (e.g. on acidification, nitrates, eutrophication, primary production anomalies) which  
are  available  through  the  Copernicus  marine  environment  service,  even  if  not  all 
pollution-specific, can be used as proxies. Most countries also report data separately (as 
concentrations in the case of chemicals) into the EIONET Reportnet86 system to inform 
the  regular  update  of  the  EEA  indicators  and  which  are  in  turn  used  to  inform 
assessments  such  as  the  (five-yearly)  State  and  Outlook  of  the  Environment  Report 
(SOER) of the EEA.  From  this data flow,  a number of indicators  are available mainly, 
linked to nutrients, but they do not always provide the best indicator for policy purposes. 
This  annual,  voluntary  dataflow  could  be  improved  and  used  more  effectively  for  the 
purpose of gathering available data to calculate annual updates of key headline indicators 
for  the  zero  pollution  monitoring  framework.  Moreover,  the  evidence  base  on  several 
aspects  of  water  and  marine  pollution  is  not  only  temporally  scarce,  but  can  also  be 
spatially  incomplete,  e.g.  with  large  gaps  in  spatial  data  distribution  especially  in  the 
southern  parts  of  Europe’s  seas87.  In  addition,  in  some  instances  not  all  pathways  are 
included, especially sea-based pollutants. 

Beyond  these  annual  indicators,  assessing  pollution  effects  on  ecosystems  has  been 
encapsulated  in  EU  laws  in  an  integrated  way  with  the  help  of  complex  assessments 
which look at the ‘status’ of the different ecosystems.  

85   See e.g. EEA Report 22/2018 
86   https://www.eionet.europa.eu/reportnet 
87   See EEA report on ‘Contaminants in Europe’s Seas’   
22 

 
 
 
                                                      
The objectives are to:  

  avoid  negative  impacts  on  land  through  the  favourable  conservation  status  of 

protected areas on land;  

  avoid  negative  impacts  on  surface  and  ground  waters  as  defined  by  the  Water 
Framework  Directive  (WFD)  through  ‘good  status’  of  coastal,  transitional 
(estuarine), rivers, lakes as well as aquifers and 

  avoid negative impacts on seas and the ocean as defined by the Marine Strategy 

Framework Directive (MSFD), through the ‘good environmental status’88.  

The indicators attached to these objectives are mostly linked to impacts but some also to 
state or pressures. They are important composite indicators aggregating a larger number 
of specific indicators based on explicit legal requirements. They are essential to monitor 
the  ecosystem  health  and  promote  the  long-term  development  of  ecosystems  towards  a 
sustainable state. However, they go beyond pollution-related issues, as they are the result 
of  many  pressures  on  the  environment.  In  some  cases,  it  would  be  possible  to  extract 
those  elements  of  the  composite  indicators  which  are  directly  linked  to  pollution 
pressures.  For  example,  for  the  marine  environment  only  use  data  for  the  descriptors  5 
(nutrients),  8  (hazardous  substances),  10  (marine  litter)  and  11  (underwater  noise);  for 
surface and ground waters use only chemical status). Future use of big data may help to 
extract the fraction of impact caused by chemical pollution, as is already done to assess 
impacts of chemicals on human health. 

As  regards  soil  pollution,  no  ecosystem-related  impact  indicator  exists  yet,  but  the 
concentration of certain  contaminants (e.g. heavy metals, some pesticides) in the soil is 
monitored  in  a  harmonized  way  across  the  EU  by  the  Land  Use  Cover  Area  Survey 
(LUCAS  SOIL)89.  The  progress  in  the  management  of  contaminated  sites  is  also 
reported by EEA-39 countries on an ad-hoc basis in the context of the EIONET. Also for 
soil indicators, it should be considered how soil pollution data collected under  LUCAS 
and  EIONET  could  be  further  enhanced  and  developed  into  one  or  more  indicators. 
Ideally, these should also reflect the combined levels of chemical pollutants in soil, and 
impacts  on  soil  ecosystems  including  microbiota.  To  capture  these  opportunities,  EEA 
and  EIONET  have  prepared  a  soil  indicator  and  threshold  framework,  while  the  Joint 
Research Centre has  launched the EU Soil Observatory90, which hosts  pan-EU datasets 
on  diffuse  soil  pollution.  Under  the  umbrella  of  the  EU  Soil  Observatory,  the  Joint 
Research  Centre  (JRC)  is  developing  a  soil  pollution  dashboard.  Both  EEA  and  JRC 
cooperate closely in the EIONET National Reference Centres (NRC) on Soil. 

These initially proposed indicators can be used for a wider assessment and will, as far as 
possible, be included in the ‘baseline’ for the first zero pollution monitoring report based 
on the WFD and MSFD reporting in 2022 as well as the latest LUCAS SOIL results. For 
updates afterwards some additional efforts will be made to access those data in Member 
States  which  are  collected  more  regularly  and  by  further  development  of  a  targeted 
pollution module in LUCAS Soil, which is integrated with MS monitoring programmes. 

88   SWD(2020) 62 
89   https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 
90   https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/eu-soil-observatory 

23 

 
                                                      
A  process  for  improving  data  availability  and  quality  of  water  and  marine  data  will  be 
started through a supporting project91.   

In addition, the mission Soil Health and Food will be instrumental in view of developing 
and harmonising soil monitoring systems in Europe, based on a set of commonly agreed 
set of soil health indicators, one of them being “presence of pollutants, excess nutrients 
and salt”.   

In addition, the National Emission reduction Commitments Directive 2016/2284 requires 
the  monitoring  and  reporting  of  ecosystem  impacts  of  air  pollution,  on  a  four-year 
basis. Reported data provide information on air pollution impacts through acidification, 
eutrophication and ozone damages on a representative network of terrestrial ecosystems 
(including freshwater ones). 

Increasingly,  the  potential  of  using  complementary  data  source,  in  particular  from 
Earth  observation,  e.g.  hyperspectral  data  from  the  EU  Copernicus  Hyperspectral 
Imaging Mission for the Environment  (CHIME)  mission, offer  a potential  to  overcome 
these shortcomings for many datasets. Moreover, the Information Platform for Chemical 
Monitoring  (IPCHEM)92  aims  to  provide  access  to  all  available  in-situ  chemical 
monitoring data directly from the sources (e.g. Member States), including some steps to 
ensure  quality  control  when  combining  datasets.  IPCHEM  provides  access  to  chemical 
monitoring  data  across  media,  i.e.  in  environmental  media  (waters,  sediments,  soil, 
biota), humans, food and feed and products. More investment in IPCHEM, especially to 
finalise consolidation of all chemical monitoring data flows through this platform in least 
aggregated form, will help deliver new data and indicators useful for the zero pollution 
monitoring.  In  particular,  monitoring  results  may  be  combined  with  effect  and  impact 
data  on  humans  (e.g.  diseases)  and  environment  (e.g.  status  of  biodiversity  and 
ecosystem health), hence providing a holistic view of the impact of combined exposure 
to  chemicals  through  various  routes  on  humans  and  the  environment.  The  monitoring 
data  may be also used for the back-calculation of pollutant emissions to water and other 
environmental  compartments,  hence  for  the  monitoring  of  progress  on  the  control  and 
phasing  out  of  pollutants  of  concern93.  The  activities  of  the  IPCHEM  should  be 
streamlined with the European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet)94 and 
with the Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring Service95, not only to pursue more 
frequent update of indicators but also to achieve integration of the pollution data with all 
the  other  available  information  and  data  on  the  marine  environment.  EMODNET  and 
Copernicus  Marine  already  include  a  wealth  of  data  regarding  the  state  of  the  marine 
environment and of multiple pollutants, and the responsible coordinators are in constant 
collaboration with MSFD actors and the EEA to increase this knowledge base and make 
more  data  openly  available.  In  order  to  have  more  regular  updated  indicators,  these 
sources may need to be used to update existing indicators more regularly or develop new 
indicators  (or  proxies  for  the  key  indicators)  that  can  be  published  on  a  more  frequent 
basis.  

91   A project on ‘Streamlining & digitalisation of water and marine monitoring & reporting’ is about to be 

launched.  

92   https://ipchem.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 
93   E.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969718352471  
94   https://emodnet.eu/en 
95   https://marine.copernicus.eu/ 

24 

 
                                                      
Many pollutants travel from the soil to air and/or water or accumulate in plants and 
animals, including marine waters and ecosystems (biota). Transfers of such pollution can 
travel  long distances even in  remote areas.  It  will be increasingly important  to  develop 
indicators  that  consider  these  cross-media  transfers  and  assess  impacts  in  an  integrated 
and holistic way, and that also consider its economic and other impacts (‘co-benefits’ or 
cross media relevance). 

4.3.  Monitoring key pressures and sources 

Pollution  pressure  indicators  complement  the  above-mentioned  set  of  key  impact 
indicators by including all point sources, which result in emissions to air, discharges to 
water  or  contamination  of  soil.  Moreover,  they  account  for  losses  or  diffuse  pollution 
which affect air, water or soil in the absence of an identified single point of pollution as 
they rather affect an area (e.g. spraying of pesticides, nitrates). They are based on a wider 
set  of  pollution  source-related  indicators,  which  give  a  measure  of  how  the  pressures 
from certain types of pollution evolve.  

Overall, there are a large number of pollution types, groups or individual pollutants96 
which  can  theoretically  be  covered.  Such  point  and  diffuse  pollution  pressures  may  be 
collected  through  inventories  or  registers  (e.g.  the  E-PRTR)97  although  many  are  not 
captured  by  the  current  databases  and  require  to  step  up  efforts  to  ensure  better 
knowledge  is  available98.  In  addition  to  such  legally-recorded  sources  of  pollution, 
unknown pollution also occurs, such as illegal dumping or unrecognised pollutants. 

For  an  integrated  pollution  monitoring,  it  will  be  important  to  capture  emissions, 
discharges  and  losses  across  the  media  and  link  them  to  the  sources  of  the  pressures. 
Knowing  the  sources  allows  to  better  understand  the  drivers  and  develop  measures  to 
eliminate or reduce pollution. Such a systemic approach has been proven very useful in 
the  context  of  the  climate  and  energy  policy99  or  the  material  flows  in  the  circular 
economy. However, despite many years of monitoring and aiming to address this issue, 
our knowledge is still somewhat poor for some questions linked to pollution100.  

Figure 3 illustrates the ineffectiveness of our material flows and how a circular economy 
is essential to reduce or even eliminate emissions into air, water and waste (see losses in 
the top right of the diagram). A similar Sankey diagram exists for nitrogen flows along 
the EU food system101.  

96   Greenhouse gas emissions are not covered by this monitoring framework. However, some pollutants 
have  climate  and  other  pollution  effects,  e.g.  methane,  so  they  may  be  covered  here  as  well  whilst 
ensuring consistency and complementarity with the climate monitoring.  

97   European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register 
98    E.g. on pesticides: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/estimating-pesticide-use-across-eu 
99   See example of energy flows  
100   E.g. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/chemicals-in-european-waters 
101    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912420300213 

25 

 
                                                      
Figure 3: Material flows in the EU economy – Sankey diagram (EU-27, 2018) 102 

Monitoring pressures is also important to assess trends and, if desirable, setting pollution 
reduction  targets.  At  the  moment,  only  few  such  targets  can  actually  be  set  and  more 
efforts are needed to assess, comprehensively, all pollution pressures.  

Initially,  the  focus  could  be  a  limited  number  of  pollutants  to  concentrate  efforts  and 
showcase  the  benefits  of  such  an  integrated  approach.  The  first  round(s)  of  the  zero 
pollution monitoring exercise(s) focus on:  

  Nitrogen  (including  its  specific  emissions  of  NOx,  NH4

+,  etc.)  &  Phosphorus 

(linked to the fertiliser, air emissions and eutrophication targets); 

  Selected  active  substances  used  in  pesticide  or  their  metabolites  (linked  to  the 

pesticides targets); 

  Particulate matter (linked to the air emission targets); 

  Heavy metals (e.g. mercury linked to the Minamata Convention, lead or copper as 

fungicide) 

  A subset of industrial chemicals (linked to hazardous chemicals)103; 

  Coastline / beach litter (linked to single use plastics).  

In  particular,  the  inventories  are  advanced  and  complete  as  regards  air  pollution.  For 
pollutants from industrial installations a detailed system of activities and a longer list of 
pollutants  exist,  but  targeting  only  some  phased  out  substances  of  very  high  concern. 
This will further improve with the revision of the related legal instruments (mainly IED 
and  EPRTR).  For  nutrients,  a  large  number  of  data  exist,  although  they  are  not  always 
integrated or available for the whole of the EU (e.g. the total nutrient discharges of rivers 

102    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/circular-economy/material-flow-diagram 
103   Building on the efforts under the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability 

26 

 
 
 
                                                      
into  the  sea  exist  for  the  Baltic  and  the  North-East  Atlantic  but  not  the  others).  Less 
information on pollutants may be available at EU level for other media (water, soil) or as 
regards pollution transfers across other sectors. But work is ongoing in several areas.  

Building on these prioritised pollutants, an initial proposal of indicators would be made 
and updated regularly.  In parallel,  a process  for  improving data  availability and quality 
will be started. In addition, it will be important to develop pressure indicators for other 
types  of  pollutants,  such  as  pharmaceuticals  (in  particular  antibiotics  used  in  animal 
production and those to be developed in the context of water policy, see Annex 2, Part E) 
or  ammonia,  and  to  take  into  consideration  initiatives  such  as  the  EU  Methane 
Strategy104. More generally, there will need to be a reflection on which pollutants can be 
added  at  this stage  and for which pollutants work is  needed to  develop  new indicators. 
This should include identifying where further research will be needed in cases where the 
relevance  is  not  proven  yet  and  the  available  data  or  evidence  is  not  yet  sufficient  for 
including these indicators in the zero pollution monitoring framework. 

One  essential  aspect  is  to  improve  the  availability  of  data  and  indicators  including  the 
collection of additional data. The feasibility of establishing reduction targets will need to 
be analysed for each pollutant group. In particular, for pesticides and industrial chemicals 
(i.e.  those  covered  by  REACH)  this  will  be  challenging  given  the  several  hundreds  or 
thousands  of  individual  substances,  respectively,  that  would  need  to  be  considered. 
Alternatively,  focus  on  emblematic  and  exemplary  pollutants  (e.g.  PFAS)105  could  be 
explored.  Once  a  baseline  for  the  total  EU  emissions  has  been  set  for  one  particular 
pollutant type, it should be possible to break it down per country or per sector106. If not, 
this should be a desirable action to complete in the coming years. This can help to give 
an indication whether in a particular country or sector is reducing pollution in general or 
only  for  some  pollutants.  This  will  be  essential  information  to  focus  actions  and 
investments in a country- and/or sector-specific way. Overall, the more granular the data 
are (e.g. also for regional level), the better for policymaking.  

4.4.  Monitoring key drivers and responses  

Once the pressure (or result) and impact indicators are established, it will be important to 
identify  which  inputs  (e.g.  financing,  resource  needs,  etc.)  and  outputs  (e.g.  plans, 
programmes,  measures,  actions,  policy  options,  etc.)  are  most  effective  to  achieve  the 
agreed  targets  and  objectives.  In  other  words,  administrations  at  EU  and  national  level 
need to reflect on the direction of public investment, the application of certain legal and 
non-regulatory  tools  and  the  incentivisation  (e.g.  through  taxes  and  financial  taxonomy 
for  sustainable  investments)  to  achieve  pollution  prevention  or  reduction.  Such 
assessment would also take into account socio-economic impacts of pollution reductions, 
either in terms of productivity gains or losses or impacts on jobs, prices, taxes, etc. At the 
same  time,  instruments  can  be  analysed  which  would  result  in  achieving  the  zero 
pollution ambition  most effectively, e.g. environmental  taxes, cuts  of harmful  subsidies 
or  application  of  the  polluters  pays  principle.  Such  information  is  also  useful  to  define 
need for action by the private sector, for example in partnership with public authorities in 

104   COM(2020) 663 
105   Work is already ongoing in the context of the  Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability to address these 

questions.  

106   Examples  already  exist  for  some  pollutants  (e.g.  the  work  on  reactive  nitrogen  through  the  UNECE 

task force). 

27 

 
                                                      
the context of sustainable finance activities including the ongoing work on the taxonomy 
for sustainable finance107.   

Such assessments typically feature in Commission’s impact assessments for a particular 
piece of law. However, a systematic, integrated approach for such evidence or even the 
development of specific input and output indicators is not well developed. If analysed per 
Member State (e.g. through the Environmental  Implementation Review) it would allow 
for a tailor-made political dialogue with Member States to identify gaps and delays and 
discuss practical solutions on how the EU could help overcome them. For example, if the 
investment  in  pollution  reduction  infrastructure  is  not  sufficient,  available  Cohesion 
Policy Funds, the Common Agriculture Policy or European Investment Bank (EIB) loans 
could  be  used.  In  addition,  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Facility  could  further  support 
Member  States  to  improve  the  pollution  reduction  infrastructure  provided  that  they 
included relevant investments and reforms in their respective national plans. 
The EU Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action108 has 
introduced a mechanism for a systematic approach for assessing actions (outputs) taken 
by  Member  States  and  providing  recommendations  on  how  to  address  remaining 
implementation  gaps.  In  the  context  of  this  regulation,  recommendations  and  guidance 
were  issued  to  Member  States  as  to  ensure  a  strong  environmental  dimension  of  the 
national energy and climate plans (NECPs). In particular, Member States were asked to 
reinforce the links with national, regional or local plans for air pollution reduction, such 
as  the  National  Air  Pollution  Control  Programme  (NAPCP),  and  relevant  air  quality 
management  plans.  A  similar  approach  is  envisaged  for  governance  under  the 
Biodiversity  Strategy.  Building  on  existing  requirements  under  the  Governance 
Regulation, further discussions are needed to identify and further develop a synergic and 
cross-cutting zero pollution approach also  taking  into account  reflections in  the context 
of the 8th EAP. In order to widen the approach taken under energy and climate laws and 
build on the ongoing reporting and implementation efforts  (e.g. under the Environment 
the  development  of  an 
Implementation  Review–EIR), 
“Environmental Implementation Indicator Framework” should take place to improve the 
systematic assessment of input and output indicators. Until now, no indicators linked to 
policy actions or drivers has been identified. They should be considered in the future as 
they react faster to change than the impacts and pressures.  

reflections 

further 

for 

4.5. 

Innovative research initiatives monitoring pollution in an 
integrated way 

Beyond  these  media  specific  indicators  (and  exposure  routes),  research  efforts  are 
underway to develop a more integrated assessment of pollution affecting the environment 
and our health. In particular, the following initiatives are worth mentioning:  

  The  European  Human  Exposome  Network109:   nine  projects  funded  by 
Horizon  2020,  the  EU  Framework  for  Research  and  Innovation  (2014-2020), 
created  a  network  in  2020,  to  address  issues  such  as  exposure  to  air  pollution, 
noise, chemicals, light, urban stressors etc. and study the related health impacts. 
The  projects  will  provide  new  evidence  for  better  preventive  policies  and  a 

107   In the context of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 
108   Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action 
109   https://www.humanexposome.eu/ 

28 

 
                                                      
toolbox  for  policy  makers  to  work  with  collected  data  and  use  it  for  evidence 
based decision-making. 

  The European Human Biomonitoring initiative (HBM4EU)110: This initiative, 
co-funded by Horizon 2020, is coordinating and advancing human biomonitoring 
in Europe and generating evidence on the actual exposure of citizens to a number 
of priority chemicals111, identified by EU regulators, agencies and member state 
stakeholders  for  their  regulatory  relevance.    Building  on  this  initiative,  the 
Partnership  for  the  Assessment  of  Risk  from  Chemicals  (PARC)  will 
continue the work under Horizon Europe. It aims to be an EU-wide research and 
innovation programme to support EU and national chemical risk assessment and 
risk management bodies with new data, knowledge, methods, networks and skills 
to  address  current,  emerging  and  novel  chemical  safety  challenges.  It  will 
facilitate  innovation  in  chemical  risk  assessment  to  better  protect  human  health 
and the environment.  

  The EU funded  SOLUTIONS112 (Solutions for present and future emerging 
pollutants  in  land  and  water  resources  management)  project  addressed  the 
challenges related to the contamination with complex mixtures of environmental 
pollutants  and  provided  consistent  solutions  for  the  large  number  of  legacy, 
present  and  future  emerging  chemicals  posing  a  risk  to  European  water  bodies 
with  respect  to  ecosystems  and  human  health.  In  addition,  it  provided  a  large 
number  of  improved  tools,  models,  and  methods  to  support  decisions  in 
environmental and water policies. For instance, a data infrastructure to compile 
and exchange environmental screening data on a European scale was established, 
as  well  as,  an  integrated  effect-based  method  for  diagnosis  and  monitoring  of 
water  quality  that  allows  to  better  characterise  the  likelihood  that  complex 
mixtures of chemicals affect water quality. 

In addition, there are other ongoing research networks which look at urban health, testing 
and screening endocrine disruptors and human exposure to  micro- and nano-plastics113. 
Moreover, Horizon Europe Work Programme 2021-2022 includes dedicated research and 
innovation  actions  to  support  filling  knowledge  and  modelling  gaps  in  the  integrated 
assessment of pollution and research will cover many different pollutants114.   

All these initiatives are ongoing and can contribute to the first zero pollution monitoring 
and  outlook  report  to  complement  the  indicator-based  assessment.  Ideally,  these 
initiatives  will  result  in  a  more  harmonised  data  generation  allowing  for  the  better  use 
and re-use of data for indicator generation. 

Information  on  the  environmental  burden  of  disease  provides  an  integrated  measure  of 
the  impact  of  pollution  on  health,  in  terms  of  specific  disease  outcomes,  DALYs  and 
premature  deaths,  with  high  communication  potential.  A  number  of  initiatives  are 
underway at international level to calculate the environmental burden of disease115, with 

110   https://www.hbm4eu.eu/ 
111   Substances  currently  prioritised  are:  Aniline  family,  Bisphenols,  Cadmium  and  chromium  VI, 
Chemical  mixtures,  Emerging  substances,  Flame  retardants,  Polycyclic  Aromatic  Hydrocarbons 
(PAHs),  Per-/poly-fluorinated  compounds,  Phthalates  and  Hexamoll®  DINCH,  Acrylamide,  Aprotic 
solvents, Arsenic, Diisocyanates, Lead, Mercury, Mycotoxins, Pesticides and Benzophenones. 

112   https://www.solutions-project.eu/ 
113   https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/health-research-and-innovation_en 
114   https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/environment_en 
115   Global Burden of Disease (GBD 2019) | Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (healthdata.org); 

The Lancet Commission on pollution and health - The Lancet 

29 

 
                                                      
both  pollutant  and  country-specific  data  held  by  the  World  Health  Organization  and 
subject to update116.  

Another integrated assessment of human and ecosystem health is increasingly mature is 
the ‘Consumption Footprint’ project. The Joint Research Centre (JRC) developed the 
Domestic Footprint indicator that addresses such environmental impacts from a territorial 
and  a  consumption  perspective  at  the  Member  State  and  EU  level  for  the  period  2000-
2018 and the Consumption Footprint indicator addressing consumption-based impacts at 
the Member State and EU level for the period 2010-2018. These indicators are available 
on the Consumption Footprint Platform117. 

The  establishment  of  planetary  boundaries  for  pollution  may  be  an  effective  and 
appealing way to select a limited number of headline indicators and translate the capacity 
of  the  planet  into  indicators  that  can  drive  change  and  monitor  progress.  The  original 
research by Rockstroem et al.118 has included several pollution-related boundaries (other 
than  climate  change),  in  particular  those  linked  to  interference  with  the  global 
phosphorus  and  nitrogen  cycles,  aerosol  loading  and  ‘introduction  of  novel  entities’ 
which  includes  chemical  pollution.  The  latest  update  by  the  group  of  scholars119  has 
developed  the  concept  further  and  re-defined  some  of  the  planetary  boundaries.  Since 
then, the EEA120 and the JRC121 have worked extensively to explore on how this concept 
can be applied in the EU policy context and within Horizon Europe there will be research 
opportunities  to  develop  and  trial  “Regional  nitrogen  and  phosphorus  load  reduction 
approach within safe ecological boundaries. In particular for nutrients, it should already 
be possible to determine a ‘planetary boundary’ indicator which could be used in the EU 
context,  e.g.  in  the  Integrated  Nutrient  Management  Action  Plan.  Also  the  above-
mentioned  JRC  work  on  environmental  footprinting  of  EU  production  (Domestic 
Footprint)  and  consumption  (Consumer  Footprint  and  Consumption  Footprint)122  uses 
the  planetary  boundaries  as  absolute  sustainability  reference  and  shows  significant 
promise.  This  could  result  in  the  identification  of  some  headline  indicators  (e.g.  on 
nutrients)  for  a  high-level  assessment  of  pollution.  Moreover,  this  could  also  help 
developing indicators for assessing the spill-over of pollution through imports of goods 
from outside the EU, another important dimension in a holistic and integrated pollution 
monitoring approach.  

There  are  a  number  of  established  or  emerging  monitoring  systems  that  could  be  used 
even  more  for  the  determination  of  an  integrated  and  combined  impact  of  pollution  on 
the  ecosystem.  On  the  one  hand,  the  regular  LUCAS  monitoring  (Land  Use/Land 
Coverage Area Frame Survey) includes the only harmonised soil assessment of the EU. It 
covers  all  land  cover  types  at  same  time  at  the  currently  22,000  location  of  soil  data 
collection (41,000 in  2022).  In addition  to  heavy  metals,  the JRC also  has performed a 
first  pilot  of  harmonised  survey  of  certain  pesticides  in  EU  soils  (over  100  active 

116   Public health and environment (who.int) 
117   https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sustainableConsumption.html 
118    Rockström,  W.  Steffen,  et  al.  (2009):  ‘Planetary  boundaries:  Exploring  the  safe  operating  space  for 

humanity. Ecol. Soc. 14, 32. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/ 

119   Steffen  et  al.  (2017) :  ‘Planetary  boundaries:  Guiding  human  development  on  a  changing  planet’. 

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855 

120   2020 EEA report ‘Is Europe living within the limits of our planet?’ 
121   E.g. ‘Environmental sustainability of European production and consumption assessed against planetary 

boundaries’ (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720306186) 

122   2019 JRC report: ‘Indicators and assessment of the environmental impact of EU consumption’  

30 

 
                                                      
substances  and  metabolites  from  3,300  sites).  Other  pollutants  may  be  monitored  (e.g. 
POPs  ((N)PAHs,  dioxins  and  furans,  PCB,  HCB),  PFAS,  microplastics)  if  additional 
budget would become  available. This  monitoring  certainly  provides  a valuable input to 
zero  pollution  monitoring.  However,  further  discussion  is  needed  on  the  continuation, 
expansion of the scope, timing and funding of the survey so that it can feature regularly 
in  zero  pollution  monitoring  and  address  the  knowledge  gaps  (see  section  4.2.2).  A 
proper  legal  basis  at  EU  level  for  the  LUCAS  survey  could  secure  the  future  of  the 
survey in the long term. The JRC is also using LUCAS samples to characterise the soil 
microbiome  through  genetic  analysis  as  a  tool  to  define  soil  health  (e.g.  response  to 
pollutants).  

An  emerging  source  of  pollution-related  data  is  the  monitoring  of  pollinators  (e.g. 
bees).  A  number  of  research  and  preparatory  projects  are  ongoing  that  collect  data  on 
pollutants  that  are  accumulating  on  honeybee  bodies  or  in  honeybee  products  (honey, 
pollen,  wax  etc.).  The  Commission  is  currently  implementing  a  pilot  project 
INSIGNIA123,  which 
the 
environment using honeybees. A follow-up preparatory action is planned for 2021, which 
will  look  to  expand  the  monitoring  scope  (heavy  metals,  air  pollutants  and  other 
pollutants but also microplastics124) and roll out the protocol across the EU.  This action 
will help to set up a regular monitoring and indicator system, which could be integrated 
into the zero pollution monitoring framework.  

is  developing  protocols  for  monitoring  pesticides 

in 

(European  Monitoring  of  Biodiversity 

Other monitoring  initiatives that can help  to  link the state of terrestrial  ecosystems  and 
pollution  pressures  are  EMBAL 
in 
Agricultural Landscapes) and EU Pollinator Monitoring Scheme125. The former is in 
pilot  phase,  while  the  latter  is  the  subject  of  discussions  between  the  Commission  and 
Member  States  in  the  context  of the  implementation  of  the  EU  Pollinators  Initiative126. 
Once fully implemented, these monitoring initiatives would provide data on the state of 
biodiversity  in  agricultural  landscapes  and  the  state  of  pollinator  populations,  which 
could be linked to land management and potential current and future sources of pollution 
(in  particular  the  use  of  pesticides  and  the  surplus  of  fertilisers).  Similarly,  the  IPBES 
pollinators assessment127 provides input to such an approach.  

Finally,  the  analytical  framework  proposed  by  IPBES  (theory  of  change)  could  be 
explored further. It focusses on the outcomes, i.e. healthy environment (ecosystems) and 
healthy  people,  and  then  identify  the  target  actions  needed  to  reduce  the  impact  of 
pollution,  which  will  be  in  terms  of  reducing  air  pollutants  emissions  and  deposition 
(across media), and improvement of the condition of terrestrial (forest, agroecosystems, 
soil, urban), freshwater and marine ecosystems.  

Another  element  is  the  impact  on  the  ecosystem  services  (i.e.  eutrophication  is 
impacting  water  quality  with  a  cost  associated).  Also  the  first  EU-wide  ecosystem 
assessment128  is  a milestone  assessment  and  has  many  indicators  and  assessment  ideas 

123   https://www.insignia-bee.eu/ 
124   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144481 
125   https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/display/EUPKH/Data+and+information 
126   EU Pollinators Initiative (COM(2018) 395)  
127   https://ipbes.net/assessment-reports/pollinators 
128   https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120383 

31 

 
                                                      
which could be factored into a more integrated approach. Together with the advances in 
Natural  Capital  Accounting129,  this  would  help  to  combine  the  overall  effects  of 
pollution with the consequences for the different economic sectors, in particular through 
the condition accounts. This would allow to use these accounts to monitor the decline or 
recovery of ecosystem services hence the economic effects of pollution. The Commission 
(Eurostat) is currently working on legislation on ecosystem accounts. Similarly, efforts to 
further develop the application of the System of Environmental Economic Accounting to 
the ocean environment130. 

With all these initiatives and projects, the question is on how to make them operational 
for the purpose of zero pollution monitoring. This will be discussed in the next stage of 
the work.  

5.  ZERO POLLUTION OUTLOOK AND FORESIGHT  

In addition to the monitoring framework which covers the current observations and past 
trends,  a  forward-looking  or  foresight  dimension  is  valuable  for  policy  making131.  For 
this,  a  number  of  methods  are  available  as  illustrated  in  the  figure  4.  In  relation  to  the 
zero  pollution  ambition,  applying  an  outlook  and  a  foresight  method  is  particularly 
interesting. Both will be further explored. . 

These two methods and related outputs will be different in nature and purpose. The Zero 
Pollution  Outlook  will  project  the  observed  pollution  trends  into  the  future  by  using 
modelling  tools.  It  may  develop  scenarios  which  compare  different  situations,  such  as 
where  no  further  actions  are  taken  (‘baseline’  or  ‘business-as-usual’  scenario)  are 
compared  to  alternatives,  or  specific  policy  scenarios  with  additional  or  more 
stringent/ambitious  measures, under different  socio-economic or climate  mitigation and 
adaptation  backgrounds.  Such  outlook  reporting  is  already  common  in  the  climate  and 
energy policies. In particular, Member States produce their own outlooks which are then 
shaping  their  national  and  EU  policies  in  the  context  of  the  Regulation  on  the 
Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action132. 

129   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/capital_accounting/index_en.htm 
130   Technical Guidance on Ocean Accounting (oceanaccounts.org) 
131   COM(2020) 493 
132   https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-strategy/national-energy-climate-plans_en 

32 

 
                                                      
Figure 4: Definition of different types of forward looking analysis 133 

When  developing  any  model-based  scenarios,  it  is  important  to  highlight  that  they 
represent  a  different  approach  than  just  forecasting  the  monitoring  results.  Models  are 
based  on  assumptions  and  have  limitations.  Uncertainty  associated  to  the  output  of  the 
models is also essential. They have to be communicated clearly and the underlying data 
and computation must be open and transparent.  
Already  in  2005,  the  EEA  produced  a  'European  environment  outlook'  report134  which 
provided a combined forward-looking and scenario-based assessment of climate change, 
air  pollution  and  water  pollution.  Since  then,  the  EEA  developed  these  approaches 
further  and  presented  the  latest  evidence  in  their  2020  State  and  Outlook  of  the 
Environment  Report135.  Other  tools  such  as  online  viewers136  can  provide  additional 
information  (the wider public included) and complement forward-looking analyses.  For 
instance,  a  floods  viewer  juxtaposed  with  maps  of  industrial  installations  and  sensitive 
ecosystems  can  help  in  identifying  points  with  a  chance  for  pollution  episodes  where 
additional measures might be needed to avert flooding. 
Since 2018, there is also a Clean Air Outlook137 building on the work undertaken in the 
preparation  (impact  assessment)  for  the  NEC  Directive138.  The  intention  for  a  Zero 
Pollution Outlook report (to be published first in 2022) is to build fully on this Clean Air 
Outlook but go beyond air pollution.  

133   Based on Zurek, M., Henrichs, T. (2007). Linking scenarios across geographical scales in international 

environmental assessments. Technological Forecasting & Societal Change 74, 1282-1295. 

134   EEA Report No. 4/2005 
135   https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer/2020  
136   https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/explore-interactive-maps#c0=5&c5=&b_start=0  
137   COM(2018)466 and COM(2020)3 
138   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/review.htm 

33 

 
 
 
                                                      
In  2022,  the  intention  is  to  publish  also  a  Clean  Water  and  Marine  Outlook’. 
Modelling work is already ongoing for many years mainly in collaboration with the Joint 
Research  Centre.  The  Blue2  project  has  developed  some  interesting  results,  which  we 
can build upon139. Since 2020, the Blue2.2 project is ongoing which aims at defining the 
business-as-usual  scenario  and  further  more  ambitious  policy  scenarios,  in  particular  in 
relation  to  nutrient  pollution,  contaminants  and  litter140  in  rivers,  lakes,  coastal  and 
marine  waters.  Some  alignment  of  parameters  with  the  air  pollution  modelling  will  be 
made. The results of this project will directly feed the Impact Assessment for the revision 
of the UWWTD, the review of the MSFD and form the basis for a first ‘Clean Water and 
Marine Outlook’ report in 2022.  

The development of a Clean Soils Outlook could complement the implementation of the 
Soil,  Biodiversity  and  Farm  to  Fork  Strategies.  While  it  may  be  too  early  to  have  a 
comprehensive  soil  dimension  by  2022,  discussions  are  ongoing  about  how  existing 
instruments  and  initiatives  (e.g.  the  ongoing  European  Soil  Condition  Assessment, 
LUCAS Soil) can support an outlook assessment for soils.  

In  addition  to  the  modelling  and  integrated  assessment  tools  discussed  above,  the 
strategic foresight is becoming increasingly important. The Commission has published 
its  first  Strategic  Foresight  Report141  in  2020  focussing  on  resilience.  An  important 
contribution of this report is that it provides a definition of resilience, i.e. the ability to 
not  only  withstand  and  cope  with  challenges,  but  also  to  transform  our  Union  in  a 
sustainable,  fair  and  democratic  manner.  The  report  identifies  how  major  trends  are 
evolving,  and  seeks  opportunities  for  change  that  will  help  Europe  rebound  from  the 
crisis. Overall, it encourages the use of foresight more systematically in all policy areas 
and announces a Strategic Foresight Agenda with a regularly updated Work Programme.  

In  line  with  this  agenda,  a  systematic,  cross  cutting  foresight  capacity  for  zero 
pollution could be developed in the areas of air quality, water, marine, soil, chemicals, 
ecosystems  policies etc.  Such exploratory foresight activity  would try to  explore trends 
and developments (and breaks in current trends and developments) in a more qualitative 
way  using  longer  term  prospective  tools  (often  referred  to  also  as  ‘horizon  scanning’). 
Such foresight can help strengthen the ability to deal with 'unexpected' developments and 
foster 'thinking outside the box'.  
A  foresight  methodology142  has  been  developed  in  the  context  of  the  ‘foresight  for  the 
environment’  (FORENV)  activities  in  the  context  of  the  Environment  Knowledge 
Community  (EKC)143.  For  the  third  FORENV  cycle,  the  Commission  services  have 
launched  a  dedicated  ‘Zero  Pollution  Foresight  activity’  as  part  of  the  wider 
Commission’s Strategic Foresight agenda (see Annex 3 for details) and will report on its 
findings as part of the 2022 Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook report.   

In  addition,  several  Commission  services  are  engaged  in  some  specific  initiatives. 
Moreover,  the  ‘Chemicals  Strategy  for  Sustainability’  announced  that  intention  to 

139   E.g.  JRC  report  (2019):  “Water  quality  in  Europe:  effects  of  the  Urban  Wastewater  Treatment 

Directive”  

140   An 

interesting  and 

inspiring  example  on  marine 

litter  and  plastics  are  available  at: 

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2020/07/23/breaking-the-plastic-wave-
top-findings 
141   COM(2020) 493 
142   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/risks/pdf/emerging_issues_methodological_framework.pdf 
143   https://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/environment_knowledge_en.htm 

34 

 
                                                      
increase the EU’s strategic foresight on chemicals in the context of key value chains and 
dependencies  (where  chemicals  are  important  building  blocks)  as  well  as  the 
development of an ‘EU early warning and action system for chemicals to ensure that EU 
policies  address  emerging  chemical  risks  as  soon  as  identified  by  monitoring  and 
research’. 

6.  DATA, KNOWLEDGE NEEDS AND DATA MANAGEMENT 

Overall,  data  technologies  have  evolved  significantly  and  there  are  many  new,  digital 
solutions which can and will allow for more efficient and effective data generation and 
management. The  general  trends  and  emerging technologies are explored in  the  related 
document on ‘Digital Solutions for Zero Pollution’144.  

As  mentioned  earlier,  the  development  of  the  monitoring  framework  will  initially  be 
based on the available data and indicators. In most cases, making better use of other data 
sources using modern digital technologies will be sufficient and no new or more frequent 
data will need to be collected. However, in some cases no data will have actually been 
collected  and  further  efforts will  be needed to  underpin policy making.  In addition, 
some  of  the  monitoring  data  suffer  of  shortcomings  in  the  findability,  accessibility, 
interoperability  and  sometimes  too  restrictive  use  rights  and  some  reporting  and 
collection flows are multiplicative145. The exercise will therefore provide an opportunity 
to  identify  and  coordinate  the  data  and  knowledge  needs  and  take  coordinated  steps  to 
meet them.  

The  uptake  of  new  digital  technologies  (e.g.  wireless  on-chip  fluid  sensors)  is  an 
accelerator  for  cost-effective  monitoring  of  surface  water,  groundwater  and  domestic 
wastewater.  Leveraging  on  such  (networked)  sensor  technologies  new  (revolutionised) 
continuous water quality monitoring system can be introduced in Member States over the 
coming years. Other innovative monitoring technologies, e.g. consisting of satellite data 
and automated monitoring technologies that collect and measure environmental DNA (e-
DNA  ),  also  have  great  potential  to  improve  data  collection,  reduce  the  costs  of 
monitoring  and  enhance  confidence  in  water  status  classification.  In  combination  such 
modern  (digital)  water  management  technologies  would  e.g.  allow  water  managers  to 
better: a) monitor the quality of their water reserves in real time; b) predict the evolutions 
of the water reserves; c) act proactively to better align water reserves with demands. 

One  underexploited  resource  is  the  harvesting  of  available  data  that  are  held  with 
national authorities but are not used for EU level policy making (yet) (e.g. some data 
are  available  at  farm  level  but  not  collected  in  most  Member  States  and  generally  not 
accessible  or  data  from  national  contaminated  sites  registers)146.  In  this  respect,  the 
INSPIRE  Directive  offers  the  opportunity  to  request  and  use  data  ad  hoc  by  using  the 
Data  Sharing  Regulation  (No.  2010/268)147  and  to  further  promote  the  active 
dissemination of environmental geospatial data through data services. The availability for 
public reuse and the accessibility of  environmental data and earth observation data will 

144   SWD(2021) 140 
145   Therefore the application of the FAIR principles (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) to 

all environmental data is promoted.  

146   To  address  this,  the  Commission  proposes  to  collect  annual  statistics  on  the  use  of  pesticides  in 
agriculture, based on the professional use records held by farmers under Regulation (EC) 1107/2009 
(see COM(2021)37). 

147   See procedural guide for data request using Commission Implementing Regulation No. 2010/268 

35 

 
                                                      
be  accelerated  by  the  Implementing  Act  on  High  Value  datasets  under  the  Open  Data 
Directive148 that is planned for adoption in 2021. The European Marine Observation and 
Data  network  (EMODnet)  operates  with  this  as  one  of  its  main  priorities  and  further 
actions are taken at the level of the Member States to further support it.  
Moreover, in the Data Strategy149 and the Digital Europe Programme as well as the EU 
Open Data Portal, there are opportunities to use modern technologies to tap into available 
data  sources  but  this  has  still  to  be  exploited.  These  initiatives  will  help  improve  data 
availability  in  general  terms  and  promote  the  effective  use  and  application  of  artificial 
intelligence.  The  key  initiative  is  the  creation  of  a  “European  Data  Space”,  through 
Common European data spaces in strategic sectors and domains of public interest. In this 
context, the Commission will support the establishment of a Common European Green 
Deal data space, to use the major potential of data in support of the Green Deal priority 
actionsand the zero pollution ambition is listed as an area for developing dedicated pilot 
exercises. The Copernicus program already transitioned to cloud technologies to make all 
satellite  data  and  information  products  available  digitally150.  Embedding  the  zero 
pollution monitoring framework within a larger commitment to digital cooperation may 
help further capitalise on the opportunities provided by the adoption of an environmental 
governance digitalization strategy based upon a range of contributions and collaboration 
between national governments, the private sector and civil society.  

In this context, the UN’s “Global Commitment for Digital Cooperation” offers also wide 
scope for improved environmental data governance. One relevant initiative is related to 
the implementation of a “Digital Ecosystem for the Environment”, a robust architecture 
and  governance  framework  consisting  of  four  elements:  a)  raw  data,  b)  a  supporting 
technological infrastructure, c) algorithms and analytics; d) insights  and applications151. 
Another  initiative  is  UNEP’s  World  Environment  Situation  Room  (WESR)152  -  a  one-
stop digital platform to access environmental data and information. The WESR platform 
on  pollution  will  help  address  knowledge  and  implementation  capacity  gaps  by 
aggregating  such  tools  and  assessments,  and  empowers  policy  makers,  partners,  and 
stakeholders to address pollution in a responsible and environmentally sound manner.  
Furthermore,  the  use  of  Earth  observation  (e.g.  by  using  Copernicus  data153  or  the 
‘Destination Earth’ initiative) is critical to address and overcome data gaps. The specific 
use  of  Copernicus  services  data  and  information  in  the  context  of  a  regular  monitoring 
and forecast initiative will support in the different domains of air, water, marine and soil 
ecosystem. The Copernicus is an operational programme since 2014 and it will continue 
to provide data and products for routine daily or sub-daily environmental monitoring for 
next  decades.  The  space  component  will  enhance  its  observational  capacities  with  new 
Earth Observation missions154 and the six services will continue and evolve operationally 

148   http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1024/oj 
149   COM(2020)66 
150   Data and Access Information Service (DIAS) 
151   https://un-spbf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Digital-Ecosystem-final-2.pdf 
152   https://wesr.unep.org/ 
153   E.g. through the Data and Access Information Service (DIAS) 
154   The  Copernicus  Carbon  Dioxide  Monitoring  mission  is  one  of  Europe’s  new  high-priority  satellite 
missions  and  will  help  to  measure  how  much  carbon  dioxide  is  released  into  the  atmosphere 
specifically through human activity. 

36 

 
                                                      
to  provide  value  added  products,  observations  and  forecasts,  in  the  years  to  come 
adapting to new requirements arising from the zero pollution goals.  

‘Destination  Earth’  initiative  (a  “digital  twin  for  the  planet”)  may  be  adopted  as 
planning  and  sustainability  optimisation  tools  which  may  support  the  assessment  of 
environmental state and pollution impact for both the “human health” and “ecosystems” 
domains. A digital twin of the ocean is contemplated on the basis of proposals made by 
the  Horizon  Mission  “Healthy  Oceans  and  Waters”.  Local  Digital  Twins  are  also 
powerful means to improve the resource management and decision-making of cities and 
communities  in  order  to,  for  example,  pursue  their  zero  pollution  ambitions.  The 
forthcoming  Digital  Europe  Programme  will  support  the  creation  of  an  EU  toolbox  for 
deployment  of  Local  Digital  Twins,  the  piloting  and  validation  of  the  data  space  on 
climate-neutral  and  smart  communities  (as  part  of  the  Green  Deal  Dataspace)  and  to 
implement concrete activities for the massive adoption of AI-enabled solutions in cities 
and communities.  

The  key  value  of  the  “digital  twins”  approach  is  its  ability  to  combine  real-time  data, 
models  and  intelligence  from  different  platforms  to  simulate,  predict  and  improve 
decision-making  –  critical  elements  for  the  “outlook  and  foresight”  exercises.  “Digital 
twins” should cover land-based pollution as well as the marine/maritime component, and 
their  impacts  on  the  atmosphere,  terrestrial  ecosystems,  freshwaters  and  the  marine 
environment. The project is going to start in 2021 but will only be a tangible support to 
the zero pollution monitoring and outlook after 2022.  

In  the  context  of  the  Chemicals  Strategy  for  Sustainability,  the  actions  under  the  ‘one 
substance,  one  assessment’  process  will  further  facilitate  and  consolidate  access  to 
available  data  on  chemicals  monitoring.  The  Information  Platform  for  Chemical 
Monitoring  (IPCHEM)  has  been  developed  to  become  a  single  access  point  for  the 
chemical  occurrence  data  in  all  media  across  the  EU.  It  is  a  decentralised  platform, 
providing remote access to existing information systems and data providers. Several EU 
authorities  are  sharing  their  data  already  through  this  portal  and  increasingly,  national 
authorities  connect  their  national  databases.  The  IPCHEM  and  its  governance  will  be 
further  developed  as  part  of  the  work  on  Common  Open  Data  Portal  on  Chemicals  to 
ensure  that  all  chemical  monitoring  data  are  made  accessible  through  the  platform.  In 
addition, a proposal will be made to streamline the flow of chemical monitoring data in 
the  environment  through  the  relevant  EU  Agencies  and  to  accelerate  move  from  data 
reporting to data harvesting. Further, obstacles for the re-use and sharing of monitoring 
data will be removed to ensure that once data are provided to EU institutions they can be 
re-used for multiple purposes and no repetitive reporting/collections occur. IPCHEM can 
be also used to connect data that are also requested under the above-mentioned INSPIRE 
mechanism  (see  Annex  4).  Meanwhile  to  ensure  data  quality  and  representativeness, 
resources need to be allocated to take the necessary quality control steps when bringing 
data sets together.  

Two dedicated projects also offer opportunities to facilitate access to available data in a 
particular domain.  Regarding  marine pollution,  the EMODnet provides data and data 
products on all the relevant descriptors, related to the marine environment, free of access 
and  strictly  follow  INSPIRE  standards.  EMODnet  and  the  Copernicus  Marine 
Environment  Monitoring  Service  (CMEMS),  the  Commission’s  long-term  initiatives 
regarding marine observation (in-situ and satellite plus modelling respectively) are going 

37 

 
to  provide  the  basis  for  the  development  of  a  Digital  Ocean  Twin  and  will  participate 
actively in  the activities of ‘Destination Earth’155.  In this context, the integration of the 
marine component is an important element to be considered from the outset. In addition, 
cooperation on marine data with international partners could also help fill the knowledge 
gaps, as demonstrated by the operational and scientific collaboration between EMODnet 
and the National Marine Data and Information Service (NMDIS) supported by the EU’s 
Partnership Instrument156. 

Finally, the use of citizen science in the context of the zero pollution monitoring should 
also be further explored. Citizen science data has the potential to sensibly contribute  to 
the  implementation  of  the  monitoring  framework.  However,  while  they  can  fill  the 
increasing demand for high-resolution spatial and temporal data, work is still needed to 
this  end,  concrete 
build  acceptance  for 
recommendations and actions to facilitate the uptake of citizen science data are provided 
in  the  Commission’s  Staff  Working  Document  ‘Best  practices  in  citizen  science  for 
environmental  monitoring’157,  which  also  includes  examples  (best  practices)  of  citizen 
science for different types of pollution. 

this  non-traditional  data  source.  To 

7.  GOVERNANCE, MILESTONES AND DELIVERABLES 

The  implementation  of  this  Zero  Pollution  monitoring  and  outlook  framework  will 
require  a  clear  and  effective  governance  of  all  partners  at  EU  level  involved  in  the 
preparation  of  the  outputs  as  well  as  all  partners  in  the  Member  States  who  are  data 
owners and users at the same time. Such a governance will build work of other existing 
governance systems158 and establish close coordination, as necessary, to create synergies.  

Following  the  adoption  of  the  Zero  Pollution  Action  Plan,  a  dedicated  outreach  and 
consultation  with  partners  outside  the  EU  institutions  and  bodies  will  be  organised  in 
2021,  mainly  with  Member  State  experts  but  also  international  organisations  and  other 
interested parties.  

This Staff Working Document provides a starting point and suggestions for the concept 
and the indicators for a zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework. Consultations 
will  take  place  throughout  2021.  This  will  result  in  a  decision  on  the  indicators  and 
evidence base to be used for the preparation of the first report in 2022. This will also feed 
into the finalisation of the zero pollution contribution to the 8th EAP monitoring.  
In parallel, Commission services and key partner agencies159 will establish a coordination 
mechanism  that  brings  together  the  best  competences  and  expertise  and  ensure  the 
cooperation  towards  the  combined  efforts  to  establish  the  monitoring  and  outlook 
framework step-by-step.  

155   See details in SWD(2021) 140 
156   Supported  by  the  EU-funded  International  Ocean  Governance:  Strengthening  international  ocean 
  https://www.emodnet.eu/en/eu-china-

data  through  the  EU's  ocean  diplomacy  project.  See 
partnership-sets-pace-international-marine-data-sharing  

157   SWD(2020) 149 
158   E.g. under the Energy Union Governance or the Biodiversity Strategy  
159   in particular the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the 
European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) as well as 
others 

38 

 
 
 
                                                      
The key milestones and deliverables are:  

For 2022 

The  first  ‘Zero  Pollution  Monitoring  and  Outlook’  report  will  be  published  by  the 
European Commission. It will provide a synthesis of the findings of various data sources 
and  ‘thematic’  reports,  in  particular  the  following  which  will  be  an  integral  part  of  the 
report:  

  Zero Pollution Monitoring: ‘Pollution affecting Health and Biodiversity’ 

(working title) presenting the results of the indicators and assessment listed in this 
SWD.  

  Zero Pollution Outlook including:  

o  Clean Air Outlook 

o  Clean Water and Marine Outlook 

o  Clean Soil Outlook160  

  Zero Pollution Foresight (i.e. the outcome of the FORENV project).  

A  number  of  stand-alone  ‘thematic’  or  ‘technical’  reports  can  and  should  be  published 
around the same time by the knowledge partners directly. The list can evolve during the 
consultation process but some examples are already given here, in particular:  

  Zero pollution monitoring by Copernicus 

  Key results of pollution-related research linked to health and ecosystems 
based on the reports including pollutants of emerging concern (e.g. ultrafine 
particles or light pollution) from EU-funded R&I projects; 

  Key results from the assessment of the final National Energy and Climate 
Plans (as published in 2020) including on issues such as biodiversity and air 
quality. 

Other  relevant  reports  published  by  other  international  organisations  will  also  be 
considered,  e.g.  the  UNEP  pollution  summary  report  as  a  deliverable  of  the 
Implementation Plan “Towards a Pollution-Free Plan”. 

In  addition  to  these  reports,  a  Zero  Pollution  online  portal  will  present  selected 
indicators  which  can  be  regularly  updated  by  the  European  Environment  Agency.  The 
nature and set up will depend on the decision taken regarding the European Green Deal 
Dashboard  and  the  8EAP  monitoring  system  which  could  ideally  integrate  the  zero 
pollution  dimension  in  these  wider  communication  tools.  Finally,  a  joined  up 
communication strategy will be developed through the zero pollution website161 will be 
proposed.  

2023 

Follow-up  on  gaps  identified  to  improve  2024  assessment  and  update  indicators,  if 
possible.  

160   Including  state  of  play  including  trends  in  heavy  metals  and  nutrients  in  agricultural  soil  and 

contaminated sites 

161 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 

39 

 
                                                      
For 2024 and beyond 

It  will  be  important  to  identify  shortcomings  and  develop  new  indicators  or  data  flows 
already  now  so  that  they  are  ideally  ready  for  use  in  2024.  Hence,  a  preliminary,  non-
exhaustive  list  of  new  elements  for  the  further  development  of  the  zero  pollution 
monitoring and outlook framework is listed in Annex 2, Part E.  

Once  the  indicator  set  for  the  monitoring  framework  has  been  agreed,  the  question  of 
aggregating or simplifying the available indicators, at least for communication purposes, 
may  arise.  It  is  attractive  to  consider  the  development  of  a  ‘zero  pollution  index’  or 
‘composite  indicator’  as  is  the  case  for  many  other  policy  areas162.  Alternatively,  a 
simplified ‘zero pollution scoreboard’163 compiling and classifying the various indicators.  

8.  CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 

The development of a zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework is a challenging 
but  worthwhile  undertaking.  It  is  clear  that  a  more  integrated  approach  offers  the 
opportunity  to  get  a  more  holistic  and  overarching  view  on  the  scale  of  the  pollution 
crisis and the pathways towards solving it successfully. It also calls for joining forces and 
making best use of the available competencies and efforts as well as share good practices 
across policy domains. The interactive and cooperative preparation of this document has 
already highlight the needs, the potential and the opportunities that can be harvest from 
the  overarching  approach  but  also  in  driving  and  inspiring  specific  developments  and 
improvements  in  certain  policy  domains  (e.g.  on  soil  or  under  the  Water  Framework 
Directive).    

This  document  is,  however,  only  a  starting  point  which  intends  to  initiate  a  wider 
discussion, a dedicated consultation and collaborative process that involves all actors and 
partners.  It  combines  the  joint  thinking  of  all  Commission  services  and  associated 
agencies  and  reaches  out  to  experts  from  Member  States,  social  partners,  industry, 
academia  and  civil  society  to  contribute  to  these  efforts.  Moreover,  dedicated  dialogue 
with international organisations and partners working on similar initiatives based on the 
global  ambition  of  the  Sustainable  Development  Goals  and  the  related  international 
agreements  will 
in  particular  with  UN  organisations,  multilateral 
environmental  agreements  and  regional  organisations  (such  as  UNECE  or  the  regional 
sea conventions).  

take  place, 

The  Commission  services  will  collect  feedback  and  input  to  the  ideas  presented  in  this 
document  through  dedicated  workshops  linked  to  the  Zero  Pollution  Stakeholder 
Platform and the wider consultations for the development of the monitoring framework 
for the 8th  Environment  Action Programme164. Moreover, the various work  strands will 
be  developed  further  between  the  Commission  services  and  the  associated  agencies  to 
have a rolling work programme with the first milestone in 2022, the presentation of the 
first set of Zero Pollution Monitoring and Outlook reports. Building on these experiences 
and closely linked to the policy needs and wider efforts under the European Green Deal, 
this framework will evolve and aim at contributing towards achieving the zero pollution 
ambition.  

162   E.g. the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 
163   E.g. EU Justice Scoreboard 
164   Consultative paper on the proposed approach and architecture for the 8th EAP monitoring framework 

40 

 
 
                                                      
ANNEX  1:  NON-EXHAUSTIVE  OVERVIEW  OF  RELEVANT  TARGETS  AND  OBJECTIVES  FOR 
POLLUTION SET OUT IN EU POLICIES AND LAWS 

1.  OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS SET OUT IN THE ZERO POLLUTION ACTION PLAN  

(SEE DETAILS IN COM(2021) 400)  

2.  OVERVIEW OF OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS IN OTHER GREEN DEAL INITIATIVES 

WITH RELEVANCE FOR THE ZERO POLLUTION AMBITION  

a.  FARM TO FORK STRATEGY (COM(2020) 381) AND BIODIVERSITY 

STRATEGY (COM(2020) 380) 

Nutrients: 50% reduction of nutrient losses by 2030. The target shall ensure that there is 
no deterioration in soil fertility and will lead to 20% reduction of the use of fertilisers.  

Pesticides:  By  2030,  50%  reduction  of  the  overall  use  and  risk  of  chemical  pesticides 
and 50% reduction of the use of more hazardous pesticides. 

Anti-microbial  Resistant  (AMR)  substances:  50%  reduction  of  overall  EU  sales  of 
antimicrobials for farmed animals and in aquaculture by 2030.  

b.  CHEMICALS STRATEGY FOR SUSTAINABILITY (COM(2020) 667) 

  Safe and sustainable production and use of hazardous chemicals 

 

Industrial transition to safe and sustainable chemicals 

  Substitute and minimise the presence of substances of concern  

  Phase out the most harmful substances, particularly in products and for vulnerable 

groups 

  High level of protection of human health and the environment 

In addition, the reduction of pollution by unit of use is set out in the wider product policy 
(in addition to REACH) including Directives on Eco-Design or EU Eco-label.   

41 

 
 
 
 
3.  OVERVIEW OF KEY ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES IN EU LAWS FOR 

AIR, NOISE, WATER, MARINE AND SOIL  

Pollution type  Target / Objective 

Deadline 

EU policy / law 

Comment 

Air Quality 

Compliance  with  EU 
air  quality    standards 
air 
several 
for 
pollutants 

Several 
deadlines 
depending 
on 
pollutant 

the  air 

Ambient 
Air 
Quality Directives 

EU  air  quality  standards 
cover 
highest 
both 
concentration and average 
exposure levels for human 
health 

Noise 
pollution  

Reduction  of  harmful 
noise levels 

Ongoing 

Water  Quality 
– nutrients 

Water  Quality 
– 
biological 
quality 
elements 

Water  Quality 
– 
chemical 
pollutants  

Compliance 
with 
limit value for nitrates 
groundwater, 
in 
threshold 
phosphate 
value  required  in  MS 
groundwater; 
for 
surface 
water, 
eutrophication 
objective 

Status  compared  with 
undisturbed 
conditions 

with 
Compliance 
environmental  quality 
standards  (EU 
level 
for  PS;  MS  level  for 
RBSPs,  groundwater 
quality standards ) 

Several 
deadlines 
depending 
on 
legislation 

2015 
(extensions 
to  2021  and 
2027 
possible) 

2015 
(extensions 
to  2021  and 
2027 
possible, 
beyond 
for 
recent PS) 

that 
more 

Environmental 
Noise  Directive, 
Outdoor 
Noise 
Directive, MSFD  

Nitrates Directive, 
Groundwater 
Directive,  WFD, 
MSFD 

Water  Framework 
Directive (WFD) 

Water 
Framework,  EQS, 
and  Groundwater 
Directives.  

Marine 
environment  

Achievement  of  good 
environment 
status 
for several pollutants 

2020 
(exceptions 
possible) 

Marine  Strategy 
Framework 
Directive 

Species 
ecosystems  

and 

Reach 
conservation 
for 
habitats 
importance 

species 
of 

favourable 
status 
and 
EU 

No deadline  Habitats  &  Birds 

Directives 

Soil Pollution 

No deadline 

Reduce  soil  pollution 
and  make  progress  in 
the  identification  and 
remediation 
of 
contaminated sites 

42 

7th  EAP,  Soil 
Thematic 
Strategy, 
Biodiversity 
Strategy 
2030  

towards 

EU 

nutrients, 
marine 
including 
noise 

litter, 

contaminants, 
energy 
underwater 

One  important  pressure  is 
pollution  

No specific target to date  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pollution type  Target / Objective 

Deadline 

EU policy / law 

Comment 

Soil pollution 

the 
on 
Limits 
of 
concentration 
in 
heavy  metals 
agricultural 
to 
which  sewage  sludge 
is applied. 

soil 

No deadline 

Sewage 
Directive 

Sludge 

Soil pollution  

Pesticide residues and 
other  substances  of 
concern 

No deadline 

Sustainable  Use 
of 
Pesticides 
Directive 

for 
baselines 
Several 
heavy 
exist 
metals 
(aggregated  and  modelled 
LUCAS  Soil,  GEMAS, 
country-
ICP  Forests, 
level), 
data 
however, 
cannot  be  separated  for 
sites  where 
is 
applied. 

sludge 

LUCAS Soil is carried out 
every  3-4 
periodically 
years, 
continued, 
evaluated  and  expanded 
according to policy needs, 
e.g.  possibly 
to  cover 
more  pesticides  residues 
and/or metabolites thereof 
and  other  substances  of 
concern. 

JRC is currently exploring 
the  potential  of  LUCAS 
soil  to  develop  a  baseline 
of  pesticide  residues  for 
agricultural soils.  

LUCAS  could  be  easily 
adapted  to  assess  other 
substances of concern. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
4.  OVERVIEW OF KEY OBJECTIVES FOR SPECIFIC POLLUTION SOURCES IN EU 

LAWS  

Pollution type 

Target / Objective  Deadline 

EU  policy 
law 

/ 

Comment 

Air  Polluting 
Emissions 

Percentage 
reductions 
several pollutants 

for 

and 
2020-29 
2030 onwards 

Emissions 
Water  

to 

Compliance  with 
emission 
limit 
for  urban 
values 
waste water 

National 
Emission 
reduction 
Commitment 
Directive 

Urban Waste 
Water 
Treatment 
Directive 

Water 
Framework 
Directive 

The  environmental  objectives 
of  certain  waterbodies  may  be 
such  that  the  emission  limit 
values required for urban waste 
water  agglomerations  are  more 
stringent  than  those  under  the 
UWWTD 

Emissions  to  air,  water,  soil  as 
well as waste 

Minimising 
industrial  emissions 
by  applying  BAT 
and  contributing  to 
water 
air 
quality standards 

and 

the 

Compliance  with 
sulphur  in  maritime 
fuel requirements  

Industrial 
emissions  

Emissions 
from 
maritime 
transport 
sector 

Ongoing 

Sulphur 
Directive 

Emissions to air  

of 
Reduction 
sulphur  content  in 
non-SECA areas  

Accelerate  rate  of 
reduction  of  NOx 
emissions 
from 
ships 

2030 

Extension of SECA areas to all 
EU areas  

Amendment 
Directive 

of 

Sulphur 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  2:  INDICATIVE  LIST  OF  PROPOSED  INDICATORS  TO  BE  EXPLORED  FOR  THE 
ZERO POLLUTION MONITORING FRAMEWORK 

STATUS OF THE ANNEX  

This annex presents an initial proposal for the selection criteria as well as some selected 
candidate  indicators  to  be  used  in  the  context  of  the  first  zero  pollution  monitoring 
framework. Further discussions will be needed before finalising the selection. After each 
cycle,  further  improvements  and  developments  can  be  made  in  the  light  of  the  lessons 
learnt and the evolution as regards indicators and assessments in the various policy areas.  

INTRODUCTION  

An  indicator  is  a  characteristic  or  attribute  that  is  measured  regularly  in  order  to  help 
assess to what extent an objective has been met.  

 

Impact  indicators  measure  global  or  long-term  effects  of  the  Commission’s 
interventions.   

  Result  indicators  measure  the  initial  or  intermediate  effects  of  the  DG's 

interventions.  

The proposed list of indicators is indicative and aims at triggering a discussion to identify 
the  best  list  illustrating  the  most  important  dimensions  of  the  zero  pollution  agenda.  It 
will need to be ‘fixed’ in the end of 2021 to allow preparation of the first Zero Pollution 
Monitoring  Report.  However,  it  will  be  reviewed  and  constantly  improved  with  the 
intention  to  update  the  list  for  the  second  round  of  preparing  the  zero  pollution 
monitoring in 2024.  

SELECTION CRITERIA  

Building  on  the  Better  Regulation  Guidelines,  two  criteria  are  particularly  relevant  for 
this exercise: 

  Frequency  –  the  indicators  should  be  updated  annually,  or  at  least  every  two 

years (although exceptions are possible for very relevant indicators) 

  Timeliness – the data should refer to recent periods, so that the results of action 
taken under this Commission can be demonstrated (as much as possible, and with 
all reservations linked to the long-term impact of environmental action).  

This  is  currently  not  necessarily  the  case  for  all  available  indicators,  in  particular  as 
regards water and marine pollution. In addition, the selected indicators should be, to the 
extent possible, ‘RACER’165, i.e.: 

(1)  Relevant,  i.e.  closely  linked  to  the  objectives  to  be  reached.  They  should  not  be 
overambitious and should measure the right thing (e.g. a target indicator for health care 
could be to reduce waiting times but without jeopardising the quality of care provided).  

(2) Accepted (e.g. by staff, stakeholders). The role and responsibilities for the indicator 
need to be well defined (e.g. if the indicator is the handling time for a grant application 
and the administrative process is partly controlled by Member States  and  partly  by  the  
EU  then  both  sides  would  assume  only  partial responsibility).  

(3)  Credible  for  non-experts,  unambiguous  and  easy  to  interpret.  Indicators  should  be 
simple and robust as possible. If necessary, composite indicators might need to be used 

165   See Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool#41 

45 

 
                                                      
instead  –  such  as  country  ratings,  well-being  indicators,  but  also  ratings  of  financial 
institutions and instruments. These often consist of aggregated data using predetermined 
fixed weight values. As they may be difficult to interpret, they should be used to assess 
broad context only.  

(4) Easy to monitor (e.g. data collection should be possible at low cost).  

(5)  Robust  against  manipulation  (e.g.  administrative  burden:  If  the  target  is  to  reduce 
administrative burdens  to businesses,  the   burdens  might   not   be   reduced,  but   just 
shifted from businesses to public administration). 

Moreover, data quality and completeness are important. Quantitative indicators should 
be  used  whenever  possible  (e.g.  amounts,  averages,  percentages,  rates,  ratios  or 
indexes). Where qualitative indicators are used, they should be objectively verifiable. 

For some pollution aspects, there are also different type of data available, not all with 
the  same  quality,  accuracy  and  granularity.  Building  on  the  rather  advanced  system  of 
data tiers established within the climate monitoring mechanism166, it may be meaningful 
to develop such a tiered approach on data quality and robustness across all pollution 
monitoring  to  allow  the use  of  different  types  of  data,  from  qualitative  (lowest  tier),  to 
high  quality  quantitative  data  (highest  tier)  with  a  mechanism  to  improve  data  quality 
towards  the  highest  tier.  To  illustrate  the  approach,  the  definition  of  three  tiers  in  the 
IPCC guidelines167 is set out below in table 1.  

Table 1: Illustration for definitions for different tier data, based on IPCC 

Tier  Definition 

1 

2 

3 

Simple  first  order  approach–spatially  coarse  default  data  based  on  globally  available 
data –large uncertainties –methods involving several simplifying assumptions 

A more accurate approach–country or region specific values for the general defaults  –
more disaggregated activity data –relatively smaller uncertainties 

Higher order methods–detailed modelling and/or inventory measurement systems –data 
at a greater resolution –lower uncertainties than the previous two method 

USE OF THE INDICATOR LIST 

The selected indicators can be used in the two main products namely: 

  A Zero Pollution online portal (which can be part of a wider dashboard for the 
8th  EAP  or  the  Green  Deal)  presenting  and  visualising  online  in  a  user-friendly 
way the indicators in Part A.  

  A  Zero  Pollution  Monitoring  Assessment  (which  can  also  be  embedded  in 
wider  reports  under  the  8th  EAP  progress  monitoring  or  the  SOER)  using 
indicators in Part A,  and C the indicators and assessments mentioned in Part D 
(which are not available annually).   

It is also important to establish a baseline, ideally with data from the year 2020, allowing 
an assessment  of  the  progress  made in the run up to 2030. 

166   See Commission Implementing Regulation 2018/2066  
167   https://www.ipcc.ch/ 

46 

 
 
                                                      
Finally,  Part  E  includes  a  list  of  indicators  and  improvements  to  develop  in  the  future, 
which  will  be  translated  into  work  programme  coordinated  across  all  zero  pollution 
dimensions.  

PART A: MONITORING TARGETS  

As  set  out  earlier,  the  Zero  Pollution  Acton  Plan  and  other  European  Green  Deal 
initiatives have identified a number of targets for 2030 and many additional targets and 
objectives  exist  in  EU  law  (see  Annex  1).  The  monitoring  of  these  targets  is  one  main 
purposes  of  the  monitoring  framework.  These  targets  are  associated  to  indicators  for 
impacts or pressures. The available indicators linked to the established targets have been 
included below. 

PART B: KEY HEADLINE INDICATORS ON IMPACTS / HARM  

KEY HEADLINE 
INDICATOR 

SUB- INDICATOR  

(TO EXPLORE) 

Impacts on human health 

REFERENCE 
(DATA SOURCE) 

COMMENTS 

EEA (?) 

to 
status, 

socio-
Linking 
economic 
if 
possible,  building  of 
ESTAT and EEA work 

1  Health 

from 
pollution  

impact 
air 

2  Health 

from 
pollution  

impact 
water 

a) Years of Life Lost (YLL) due 

to PM2.5 (or premature 
deaths) 

b) Exposure to PM2.5 

concentration in exceedance 
of the standards set in clean 
air legislation 

a) Proportion of population using 
drinking water which does not 
meet requirements of the 
Directive  

EEA (CSI004) 

COM / EEA 

Available  annually  only 
onwards 
from 
2023 
(new  Directive), 
in 
2022,  data  from  current 
critical. 
if 
Directive 
Explore 
of 
analysis 
specific  pollutants  (e.g. 
PFAS, 
pesticides, 
nitrates) 

See  also  EEA  Report 
21/2019 
2020 
Bathing Water Report 

and 

Data  on  urban  waste 
water  not  collected  or 
which does not meet the 
requirements 
the 
Directive  for  biological 
treatment 

of 

socio-
to 
Linking 
economic  status  will  be 
made, if possible 

b) Bathing sites with excellent 

water quality 

(CSI022/ 

EEA 
WAT004) 

c) Proportion of urban waste 
water which does not meet 
requirements of the Directive 
(collection/ secondary 
treatment) 

EEA 

3  Health  impacts 
soil 

from 
pollution 

To be identified (see part C) 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
KEY HEADLINE 
INDICATOR 

SUB- INDICATOR  

(TO EXPLORE) 

REFERENCE 
(DATA SOURCE) 

COMMENTS 

4  Health  impacts 
from  industrial 
chemicals 

To be identified (see Part C) 

Impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems 

5  Biodiversity 

and  ecosystem 
impacts 
from 
air pollution  

Impact  of  air  pollution  on 
ecosystems 
through 
acidification,  eutrophication  and 
ozone 

EEA 

No  indicator  available 
at the moment. 

Linking 
economic status 

to 

socio-

every 

under 

Available 
four 
years 
NEC 
Directive  or 
existing 
on 
indicators 
EEA 
exceedances  of  ozone, 
eutrophication 
and 
thresholds 
acidification 
LRTAP 
on 
based 
(updated 
annually/biannually) 

6  Biodiversity 

and  ecosystem 
impacts 
from 
water pollution 

a) Exceedances168 of nitrates 
concentrations above the 
threshold for drinking waters 
in groundwater 

(WISE-
/ 

EEA 
4/CSI020) 
Eurostat 
(sdg_06_40) 

Annual  WISE  SoE  data 
collection;  EEA  report, 
link 
exceedances 
under  Nitrates  Directive 
to be discussed.  

to 

b) Nitrogen/phosphorus in 

rivers/ phosphorus in lakes or 
Nutrients in freshwater 

EEA 
(WISE-4) 
or EEA (CSI020) 

Annual  WISE  SoE  data 
collection, EEA report 

a) Nutrients in transitional, 

coastal and marine waters 

EEA  (CSI  021/ 
MAR 005) 

Annual  WISE  SoE  data 
collection, EEA report 

7  Biodiversity 

and  ecosystem 
impacts 
from 
marine 
pollution 

b) Chlorophyll concentrations 
coastal waters (Either sub-
indicator 1: percentage of MS 
EEZ with chlorophyll-a 
deviations on a monthly basis or 
sub-indicator 2 chlorophyll-a 
anomalies monthly of MS EEZ) 

EEA  

(building  on  UN 
Environment) 

Combination  of  in  situ 
data 
and  Copernicus 
MEMS  or  better  link  to 
SDG14.1.1  work,  see 
also EEA report 

c) Hazardous substances in 

EEA 

marine organisms 

8  Biodiversity 

To be identified (see Part C) 

and  ecosystem 
impacts 
from 
soil pollution 

Annual  WISE  SoE  data 
collection, EEA Report 

annual 

No 
indicator 
available at the moment. 

168 https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/nitrate-in-groundwater-2#tab-chart_2 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                      
KEY HEADLINE 
INDICATOR 

SUB- INDICATOR  

(TO EXPLORE) 

REFERENCE 
(DATA SOURCE) 

COMMENTS 

To be identified (see Part C) 

9 

Environment 
impact 
industrial 
chemicals 

from 

annual 

No 
indicator 
available at the moment. 

Pollution of emerging concern 

10  Air pollution 

to be identified 

11  Water pollution 

to be identified 

12  Marine 

pollution-litter 

Environmental status  –  coastline 
(macro) litter (Descriptor 10) 

JRC/EEA 

Annual  update  using 
litter 
EEA’s  marine 
watch  and  MSFD  data 
collected by EMODNET 

13  Soil pollution 

to be identified 

PART  C:  KEY  HEADLINE  INDICATORS  FOR  EMISSIONS  AND  OTHER  POLLUTION 
PRESSURES ON THE ENVIRONMENT (FOR TREND ANALYSIS)169 

1 

2 

3 

4 

POLLUTION 
TOPIC 
SECTOR 

OR 

KEY 
INDICATOR 

HEADLINE 

REFERENCE 
(DATA 
SOURCE) 

COMMENTS 

Air emissions  PM2.5 emissions per MS  EEA 

(CSI040) 

HELCOM/ 
OSPAR/ 
BARCON/ 
ICPDR 

Eurostat 
(sdg_12_10) 

Air emissions  NOx 

NH3 
and 
emissions per MS (in kt) 

Marine 
pollution 

Nutrient  emissions  from 
rivers  into  the  marine 
environment 

Hazardous 
chemicals 

total 
Aggregated 
and 
production 
of 
consumption 
hazardous 
chemicals 
(hazardous  for  human 
health and environment) 

EEA (CSI040) 

emissions 

Annual 
published  by 
organisations (to be checked) 

data 
international 

Derived from PRODCOM 

To be further developed in 
line with objectives of the 
Chemicals Strategy  

169   Linking to socio-economic status will be made, where possible 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                      
POLLUTION 
TOPIC 
SECTOR 

OR 

KEY 
INDICATOR 

HEADLINE 

REFERENCE 
(DATA 
SOURCE) 

COMMENTS 

Agriculture-
fertiliser 

Gross  nutrient  balance  
(N and P) 

ESTAT 
(aei_pr_gnb) 

. 

Pesticides 

Use and risk of chemical 
(Risk 
pesticides 
Indicator (HRI1)) 

ESTAT 
(aei_hri) 

Pesticides 

ESTAT 

of 

Use 
hazardous pesticides 

the  more 

Industry 

Industrial 
intensity 

pollution 

(see 

EEA 
CSI055 
indicator)/ 
ESTAT 

EMSA 

Maritime 
transport 

Maritime 
transport 

emissions 

from 
(SOx,  NOx, 

Air 
vessels 
PM2.5) 

Vessel discharges  

EMSA 

related 

(discharges 
to 
nitrates  from  sewage,  but 
also  heavy  metals  and 
from  wash  water 
PAH 
discharges  from  scrubbers, 
etc.) 

link 

Indicator 
to  nutrient 
reduction target in the Farm to 
and  CAP 
Fork  Strategy 
Communication170.  

The  Commission  proposes  to 
Nutrient 
Gross 
collect 
Balances171.  

link 

Indicator 
to  pesticides 
reduction target in the Farm to 
Fork Strategy 

link 

Indicator 
to  pesticides 
reduction target in the Farm to 
Fork  Strategy  and  the  CAP 
Communication172.  

Based  on  E-PRTR  or  air 
emissions account as included 
in SDG 9 

Emission  model 
from 2022 

available 

Emission/discharge 
available from 2024. 

model 

Consumption 
and 
Production  

Pollution 
indicator for EU 

Footprint 

JRC 

https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/s
ustainableConsumption.html 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

170   Annexes to COM(2020) 846 
171   COM(2021) 37 
172 Annexes to COM(2020) 846 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                      
PART D: KEY HEADLINE INDICATORS FOR REGULAR ASSESSMENT (AVAILABILITY OF EVERY 
3-6 YEARS)173 

POLLUTION 
TOPIC 

KEY HEADLINE INDICATOR 

COMMENTS 

REFERENCE 
(DATA 
SOURCE) 

Impacts on human health 

a  Noise pollution  DALY (Disability Adjusted Life Years) 

EEA 

b  Noise 

pollution174  

Number  of  people  at  high  noise  levels 
(above 55 dB Lden) 

EEA 

Only  available  every 
five  years  –  explore 
higher frequency 

Only  available  every 
five  years  –  explore 
higher frequency 

c  Water 

chemicals 
surface 
groundwater 

– 
in 
and 

Exceedances  of  EQS  for  PS  relevant  to 
human  health 
(surface  waters)  and 
exceedances  of  quality  standards  for 
nitrates and pesticides in groundwater. 

ENV / EEA  Available  every 

six 
years  under  WFD  – 
explore  more  regular 
data harvesting 

d  Water  quality-
drinking  water 
(optional) 

Share  of  population  with  access 
drinking water 

to 

ENV 

Available  every 
six 
years  only  with  new 
Water 
Drinking 
Directive  from  2028 
onwards  (new  Article 
18(1)a) 

Impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems 

e  Water  quality- 
surface  waters 
and 
(fresh 
coastal) 

f  Water  quality-
and 

surface 
groundwaters  

g  Water  quality-
groundwaters 

h  Water  quality-

marine 
pollution 

i  Water  quality-

marine 
pollution 

Ecological  status  – 
element 
invertebrates)  

for 

relevant  quality 
(benthic 

pollution 

Chemicals  status  -  pesticides  in  water 
indicator 

status 

Chemical 
groundwater 
(exceedance  of  QS  for  nitrates  and 
pesticides) 

of 

Environmental 
(Descriptor 5)  

status 

- 

nutrients  

Environmental  status  –  contaminants 
(Descriptor 8)  

ENV / EEA  Available  every 

six 
years,  update  available 
in 2022 

ENV / EEA  WISE  SoE  reporting  -
under 

currently 
development 

ENV / EEA  Available  every 

six 
years,  update  available 
in 2022 

ENV / EEA  Available  every 

six 
years,  update  available 
in 2024 

ENV / EEA  Available  every 

six 
years,  update  available 
in 2024, indicator to be 
defined consistent with 
freshwater 

173   Linking to socio-economic status, where possible.  
174   Check alternative indicator: ‘Population living in households considering that they suffer from noise, 

by poverty status (sdg_11_20)’ 

51 

 
 
                                                      
POLLUTION 
TOPIC 

KEY HEADLINE INDICATOR 

j 

Soil 
(local) 

pollution 

Number  of  contaminated 
progress 
contaminated sites 

in 

the  management 

sites  and 
of 

REFERENCE 
(DATA 
SOURCE) 

EEA 
(LSI003/ 
CSI 015) 

k  Soil pollution 

LUCAS  Soil 
antibiotics and pesticides, nutrients 

indicators  of  metals, 

JRC  

l  Chemicals/Food  Exceedances of limit values of hazardous 

EFSA 

chemicals for food safety  

Or  Hazardous  chemical  (residues)  and 
content of heavy metals in food 

COMMENTS 

No  regular  updating 
process,  but  a  strategy 
the 
improve 
to 
reporting  is  prepared 
and being discussed 

Regular  update  on  the 
current  status  of  these 
parameters  in  topsoils. 
of 
Development 
and 
indicators 
be 
thresholds 
clarified. 

to 

Build  on  Chemical 
contaminants 
occurrence  data,  can 
be updated every 2-3 
years 

PART E: INDICATORS TO BE DEVELOPED  

POLLUTION TOPIC 

KEY 
INDICATOR 

HEADLINE 

LEAD 

COMMENTS 

By 2022 

1  Water and marine pollution  Chemical  pollution  of 
priority 

of 

groups 
substances 

EEA 
/ 
ECHA 

In  situ  data  (using  INSPIRE 
to 
and 
mechanism 
IPCHEM), 
POPs 
link 
Regulation,  define  groups  (e.g. 
PFAS) 

link 
to 

2  River and Marine Pollution  Microplastics 

Explore possibilities  

3  Marine pollution 

Number  of  “significant 
oil spills” 

EMSA  Starting  with  CleanSeaNet  data 
HELCOM/OSPAR, 

for 
extension of coverage later 

4  Marine pollution 

Floating macro litter 

tbc 

Copernicus, link to SDG14.1.1b 
work and reflections in TG litter  

5 

Industrial chemicals 

Industrial  transition  to 
sustainable 
safe  and 
chemicals 

tbc 

6 

Integrated  - Health and 
environment 

EEA 

of 

Development 
a 
European  Environment 
and  Health  Quality 
Index Atlas 

Provides  a  vehicle  into  which 
further  health-based  indicators 
might  be  used,  supplementing 
other indicators 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
POLLUTION TOPIC 

By 2024 or beyond 

Integrated health 
assessment 

Integrated 
assessment of pollution 

Ecosystem 

7 

8 

9  Chemicals 

10  Chemicals 

11  Chemicals 

12  Air pollution 

13  Water pollution 

14  Water pollution 

15  Marine pollution  

16  Marine pollution 

17  Soil pollution 

18 

Integrated    -  Health  and 
environment 

KEY 
INDICATOR 

HEADLINE 

LEAD 

COMMENTS 

Building  on  Exposome  and 
HB4EU/PARC projects 

Ecosystem Accounting  

ESTAT 

follow up of KIP-INCA project 

EMBAL and other projects 

Pollinator monitoring 

COM 

Hazardous 
chemicals/Substances 
of concern in products 

ECHA  Links  to  Circular  Economy  and 

Chemicals Strategy 

Exposure/impact 
and 
humans 
environment 

tbc 

on 
the 

To  monitor  progress  on 
objectives  of 
Strategy 

the 
the  Chemicals 

Safe  and  sustainable 
of 
production/use 
hazardous chemicals 

tbc 

To  monitor  progress  on 
objectives  of 
Strategy 

the 
the  Chemicals 

Nanoparticles/ultrafine 
particles, Black Carbon 

(NOx from shipping) 

New  indicator  on  PM  much 
smaller  than  2.5  increasingly 
relevant  for  air  pollution  from 
transport 

Integrated 
of chemical risks 

assessment 

EEA 

Building 
18/2018, link to IPCHEM 

on  EEA  Report 

Pharmaceuticals 
water 

in 

Integrated 
health-pollution part 

ecosystem 

EEA 
JRC 

EEA 

Underwater 
indicator 

Noise 

/ 

Building on WFD watchlist, link 
to IPCHEM 

Building 
17/2019, link to IPCHEM 

on  EEA  Report 

monitoring 
on 
Building 
(observation  &  modelling)  and 
work of TG Noise 

JRC 

Build on watchlist 

EEA  and  JRC  prepare  initial 
indicator  application  on  diffuse 
ongoing 
pollution 
European 
condition 
assessment 

soil 

the 

for 

tbc 

Soil  genomics  indicator 
impact  of 
to  assess 
pollution 
on 
microorganisms 

pollution 

and 

Soil 
health 

Soil pesticide indicator 

Health and Biodiversity 
and  ecosystem  impacts 
from  soil  pollution  and 
industrial 
from 
chemicals 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  3:  OVERVIEW  OF  POSSIBLE  POLLUTANTS  TO  BE  COVERED  BY  THE  ZERO 
POLLUTION OUTLOOK REPORT  

CLEAN AIR OUTLOOK

175 

First  Clean  Air  Outlook  published  in  2018176,  second  Clean  Air  Outlook  in  January 
2021177.  

Pollutants currently covered are:  

  Ammonia (NH3) 

  Nitrogen oxides (NOx) 

  Fine particular matter (PM2.5)  

  Sulphur dioxide (SO2)  

  Non-Methane Volatile organic compounds (NMVOC) 

  Methane (CH4)  

  Black carbon, directly emitted ultrafine 

This  work  will  now  also  be  further  developed  including  the  link  to  water  and  marine 
outlook  mainly  through  ecosystem  assessment  under  National  Emissions  Reduction 
Directive (NEC), in particular as regards nitrogen emissions. Moreover, the air pollution 
emissions  from  vessels  (maritime  transport)  are  currently  assessed  within  the  first 
European Maritime Transport Environmental Report (EMTER). This work could also be 
closer associated in the future.  

CLEAN WATER AND MARINE OUTLOOK  

No Clean Water and Marine Outlook is available yet. Ongoing work in the context of the 
BLUE2 project of the JRC will form the basis.  

Pollutant categories currently covered by various JRC projects for which baselines have 
been or will be produced:  

  nutrients (N, P) 

  pesticides (ca. 400 chemical active substances)  

  coliforms (possibly limited to human sources)  

  biodegradable organic matter (BOD) 

  pharmaceuticals in waste water  

  diffuse pollution associated with urban runoff and indirect industrial discharges 

(e.g. metals, PAH)  

  microplastics from waste water (e.g. fibers) and from urban runoff (e.g. tyre wear)  

  veterinary antimicrobials 

  Water Framework Directive (WFD) priority substances.  

  Marine Litter (including loss of containers as emerging issue) 

175 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/outlook.htm 
176 COM(2018) 446 
177 COM(2021) 3 

54 

 
                                                      
Pollutant categories currently not addressed are industrial chemicals, contaminated sites 
and  persistent  organic  pollutants  (POPs)  and  based  litter  modelling  from  source  (to  be 
addressed under Blue2.2).  

The first results will feed the Zero Pollution Outlook in 2022 and the Integrated Nutrient 
Management Action Plan. Further improvements of the Clean Water and Marine Outlook 
will  be  identified  then  as  well.  Thereafter,  the  work  will  be  developed  further  possibly 
also including other areas, pollutants or sectors such as marine pollution from maritime 
transport.   

CLEAN SOIL OUTLOOK  

There  is  no  EU  Clean  Soil  Outlook  available  yet.  The  outcomes  of  LUCAS  Soil,  JRC 
modelling  and  EEA  Assessments  and  the  Agriculture  Outlook178  could  be  used  to 
provide an initial baseline in 2022 for:  

  nutrients (N, P) 

  pesticides  

  metals pollution (and other diffuse pollution)  

  veterinary antimicrobials (tentatively) 

  contaminated sites 

Pollutant  categories  currently  not  addressed  are  industrial  chemicals  and  persistent 
organic  pollutants  (POPs)  and  plastics.  A  roadmap  to  further  develop  the  Clean  Soil 
Outlook will be identified.  

ZERO POLLUTION FORESIGHT 

Priority Objective 5 of the 7th Environmental Action Programme (7th EAP)179 established 
the need to improve the knowledge and evidence base for Union environment policy, to 
ensure,  inter-alia,  ‘that  (by  2020)  the  understanding  of,  and  the  ability  to  evaluate  and 
manage, emerging environmental and climate risks are greatly improved’. 
Accordingly,  in  2015  the  Environment  Knowledge  Community  (EKC180)  decided  to 
jointly  ‘strengthen  the  Commission's  capacity  to  anticipate  emerging  issues,  including 
through foresight tools as well as to monitor and identify opportunities and complex risks 
and foresee their impact on environment and society’. 

Capitalising and bringing together  existing knowledge, expertise and practices, in  2017 
the EKC partners have established FORENV, the EU foresight system for the systematic 
identification of emerging environmental issues, whose overall aim is: 

To  identify,  characterise  and  assess  emerging  issues  that  may  represent  risks  or 
opportunities  to  Europe’s  environment,  and  to  communicate  these  results  to  policy-
makers and other stakeholders, encouraging appropriate and timely action to be taken.   

178   https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/farming/documents/agricultural-

outlook-2019-report_en.pdf 

179   Decision No 1386/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 on a 
General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020 ‘Living well, within the limits of our planet’ 
180   The  Environment  Knowledge  Community  (EKC)  is  an  informal  platform  of  6  EU  actors  (ENV, 
CLIMA,  RTD,  JRC,  ESTAT  and  EEA)  that  was  set  up  in  2015  with  the  objective  to  improve  the 
generation and sharing of environmental knowledge for EU policies 

55 

 
 
                                                      
Following  the  adoption  of  the  Commission´s  first  Strategic  Foresight  Report  in 
the 
September  2020,  FORENV  will  be  further  developed  and  contribute 
Commission’s approach to foresight and the strategic work programme on foresight.    

to 

FORENV  runs  in  annual  cycles,  where  around  10  emerging  issues  and  related  risks 
and/or  opportunities  and  benefits  for  environment  and  society  are  identified, 
characterised  and  communicated.  This  cycle  will  be  dedicated  to  the  zero  pollution 
ambition.  

The  European  Green  Deal  has  set  out  a  zero  pollution  ambition  for  a  toxic  free 
environment.  This  long-term  vision  needs  to  be  seen  as  part  of  the  overall  green  (and 
digital)  transformation  that  the  Commission  foresees  for  the  EU  towards  becoming  a 
climate-neutral, circular, clean and biodiverse region in the world.  

The  Commission  has  announced  the  presentation  of  a  Zero  Pollution  Action  Plan  for 
air, water and soil in the second quarter of 2021181. In this context, the identification of 
emerging trends, and future opportunities, benefits and risks will be important.  

The overarching objective of this specific FORENV exercise is to: 

 

Identify  and  analyse  potentially  emerging  issues  and  benefits  related  to  the  zero 
pollution ambition; 

  Feed into the establishment of the zero pollution monitoring and outlook framework 

and the EU early warning and action system for chemicals; 

  Provide  an  initial  input  for  a  wider  stakeholder  engagement  (e.g.  with  first  results 
feeding into at the Green Week 2021) and a Zero Pollution Stakeholder Forum from 
2022 onwards.  

  Make strategic foresight an integral part of future zero pollution policy making.   

This  third  annual  FORENV  cycle  has  started  and  will  finish  by  the  end  of  2021.  The 
cycle  will  focus  on  the  Zero  Pollution  ambition  for  a  toxic-free  environment, 
contributing to the launch and the implementation of the Zero Pollution Action Plan for 
air, water and soil and feed into related reflections on ‘early warning mechanism’ under 
the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability. The FORENV contribution will be part of the 
outlook activities in the context of the integrated Zero Pollution monitoring that is under 
development. Preliminary first results can inform stakeholder engagement at Green Week 
2021  and  thereafter,  the  final  results  can  then  feed  into  the  first  Zero  Pollution 
Monitoring and Outlook report which is scheduled for the end of 2022.  

Pollution has been at the centre stage of EU environment policy for many decades but 
all  too  often  the  specific  policies  (on  air,  water,  soil)  have  been  reactive  and  not 
proactive. The precautionary principle and the desire for prevention, rather than control 
or remediation, has been long expressed but not always been successfully applied182. The 
European  Green  Deal  and  the  Strategic  Foresight  agenda  now  offer  an  opportunity  to 
start  a  more  systematic  and  regular  process  which  ultimately  helps  to  identify  the 
context  (trends,  drivers).  This  will  contribute  to  the  identification  of  pathway(s) 
towards a zero pollution world and identify benefits, opportunities and risks early on in 
the  policy  discussions.  In  this  respect,  the  pollutants  of  emerging  concern  for  human 

181   See Roadmap 
182   See  EEA  reports  on  ‘Late  lessons  from  early  warnings’  (1st:  22/2001    and  2nd:  1/2013)  for  many 

pollution related examples  

56 

 
                                                      
health  or  the  environment  (biodiversity)  are  of  relevance.  Moreover,  economic  and 
societal  issues  and  trends  will  have  an  influence  on  our  ‘polluting’  behaviours  and 
patterns.  But  we  don’t  necessarily  know  which  trends  have  the  most  beneficial,  which 
ones  the  most  detrimental  effect.  One  such  example  of  a  trend  is  the  link  to  the  digital 
transition which could be explored. This would then also allow for a contribution to one 
of the key topics in the Commission’s foresight agenda, namely: ‘Deepening the twinning 
of  the  digital  and  green  transitions’.  As  overall  orientations  for  the  elaboration  of  the 
concrete issues, the following are proposed:  

Which  emerging  societal,  economic  or  environmental 
(i.e.  benefits, 
opportunities and/or threats) will impact our ability to deliver a zero-pollution ambition 
for a toxic-free environment by 2050? 

issues 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  4:  ILLUSTRATIVE  EXAMPLE  ON  HANDLING  OF  CHEMICAL  MONITORING  DATA 
IN ENVIRONMENT 

The reporting practices and handling of chemical monitoring data in environment could 
be improved to a large degree. There is some multiple reporting of the same data to the 
Commission,  EEA  or  international  organisations  and  some  have  very  restrictive  use 
rights  so  they  cannot  be  reused  for  other  purposes.  Typical  example  is  a  multiple 
reporting  of  monitoring  data  of  persistent  organic  pollutants  in  water  environment  that 
takes  place  as  part  of  the  implementation  reporting  of  the  POPs  regulation,  Stockholm 
Convention  effectiveness  evaluation  and  as  part  of  a  bigger  set  of  data  under  WFD 
implementation  reporting,  WFD  prioritisation  exercise  and  a  state  of  environment 
reporting  (see  figure  below).  Further,  some  chemical  monitoring  data  are  not 
appropriately stored and there are challenges in knowing what data exist and in accessing 
them, such as e.g. data collected for the WFD prioritisation exercise, WFD watchlist or 
LUCAS  soil  survey.  In  addition,  there  are  some  parallel  initiatives  to  improve  the 
situation  without  sufficient  coordination,  such  as  developments  of  IPCHEM,  Reportnet 
2.0 and WISE.  

Inefficiency and ineffectiveness in providing chemical monitoring data in environment is 
caused, among other, by very fragmented data flows that when established, did not fully 
consider  the  possible  re-use  of  data  (silo  approach)  or  organisational  and  technological 
developments (such as that chemical monitoring data were made machine readable under 
INSPIRE obligations and Member States make them usually publically available). Other 
factors  include  differences  in  legal  requirements  or  lack  of  technical  and  financial 
resources to collect the data and handle them in a more centralised way. 

Solution 
Making chemical monitoring data available via  IPCHEM combined with the legislative 
changes to remove obstacles for reuse of data and to better stream the data (as set by the 
Chemicals  Strategy  for  Sustainability)  provides  a  solution  to  rationalise  data  flows, 
improve  accessibility  and  interoperability  of  data  and  significantly  improve  efficiency 
and  effectiveness  of  the  provision  of  chemical  monitoring  data  in  the  environment. 
Databases  that  are  used  by  National  Authorities  to  report  the  monitoring  data  could  be 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
dynamically connected to the Information Platform for Chemical Monitoring (IPCHEM) 
and  harmonized  within  the  IPCHEM  infrastructure.  Those  Member  States  wishing  to 
store  their  data  directly  in  the  IPCHEM  could  do  so  through  IPCHEM  cloud  service 
(either because of saving of resources, because of non-existence of national databases or 
because of joint work (e.g. watchlist)). 

The  responsibility  for  maintaining  the  connections  between  IPCHEM  and  national 
databases and for hosting the data, both organisationally and technically, would lie with 
the IPCHEM module coordinator, which would be one of the EU Agencies. Any quality 
control of data would be done when connecting or uploading the databases to IPCHEM 
or  when  performing  a  certain  analysis.  Any  discrepancies  on  data  quality  would  be 
solved directly with the national data holders and would be reflected through the updated 
of national database(s). 

National Authorities would not report the monitoring data to EU Agencies, Commission 
or international organisations, as there would be dynamic link established between their 
databases  and  IPCHEM.  Instead,  EU  Agencies,  Commission  or  International 
Organisations  would  access  the  data  through  IPCHEM  and  could  facilitate  the 
preparation  of  the  necessary  analyses  and  reports.  National  Authorities  would  remain 
involved in the design and validation of the analysis. 

59