COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Environmental Implementation Review Country Report - LATVIA Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Environmental Implementation Review for prosperity and security
Date: 2025-07-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, Latvia, application of EU law, biodiversity, circular economy, climate change policy, environmental law, governance, pollution control measures, waste management

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 7.7.2025  SWD(2025) 315 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Environmental Implementation Review        Country Report - LATVIA               Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Environmental Implementation Review for prosperity and security       {COM(2025) 420 final} - {SWD(2025) 300 final} - {SWD(2025) 301 final} - {SWD(2025) 302 final} - {SWD(2025) 303 final} - {SWD(2025) 304 final} - {SWD(2025) 305 final} - {SWD(2025) 306 final} - {SWD(2025) 307 final} - {SWD(2025) 308 final} - {SWD(2025) 309 final} - {SWD(2025) 310 final} - {SWD(2025) 311 final} - {SWD(2025) 312 final} - {SWD(2025) 313 final} - {SWD(2025) 314 final} - {SWD(2025) 316 final} - {SWD(2025) 317 final} - {SWD(2025) 318 final} - {SWD(2025) 319 final} - {SWD(2025) 320 final} - {SWD(2025) 321 final} - {SWD(2025) 322 final} - {SWD(2025) 323 final} - {SWD(2025) 324 final} - {SWD(2025) 325 final} - {SWD(2025) 326 final}  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Latvia  1 

Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 2 

PART I: THEMATIC AREAS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 

1. CIRCULAR ECONOMY AND WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................. 3 
Transitioning to a circular economy ..................................................................................................................... 3 
Waste management ............................................................................................................................................. 6 
2. BIODIVERSITY AND NATURAL CAPITAL ........................................................................................................................... 11 
Global and EU biodiversity frameworks ............................................................................................................. 11 
Nature protection and restoration – Natura 2000 ............................................................................................. 11 
Recovery of species ............................................................................................................................................ 13 
Recovery of ecosystems ..................................................................................................................................... 15 
Prevention and management of invasive alien species ...................................................................................... 21 
Ecosystem assessment and accounting ............................................................................................................. 22 
3. ZERO POLLUTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 24 
Clean air ............................................................................................................................................................. 24 
Industrial emissions ............................................................................................................................................ 25 
Major industrial accidents prevention – Seveso ................................................................................................. 27 
Mercury Regulation ............................................................................................................................................ 29 
Noise .................................................................................................................................................................. 29 
Water quality and management ........................................................................................................................ 30 
Chemicals ........................................................................................................................................................... 35 
4. CLIMATE ACTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 38 
The EU emissions trading system ....................................................................................................................... 38 
Effort sharing ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 
Land use, land-use change and forestry ............................................................................................................. 40 
Adaptation to climate change ............................................................................................................................ 40 

PART II: ENABLING FRAMEWORK – IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS ............................................................................ 42 

5. FINANCING ............................................................................................................................................................. 42 
Climate finance landmarks ................................................................................................................................. 42 
Environmental financing and investments ......................................................................................................... 42 
Public financial management ............................................................................................................................. 47 
Priority actions ................................................................................................................................................... 49 
6. ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE ................................................................................................................................. 50 
Information, public participation and access to justice...................................................................................... 50 
Compliance assurance ........................................................................................................................................ 52 

Environmental Implementation Review 2025 – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU-supported environmental capacity building ................................................................................................. 56 

Latvia  2 

Environmental Implementation Review 2025 – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Latvia  3 

Executive summary 

Implementation  Review,  a 

In  May  2016,  the  European  Commission  launched  the 
regular 
Environmental 
reporting 
tool  based  on  analysis,  dialogue  and 
collaboration  with  EU  Member  States  to  improve  the 
implementation  of  existing  EU  environmental  policy  and 
legislation (1). Following previous cycles in 2017, 2019 and 
2022,  this  report  assesses  the  progress  made  while 
the  main  outstanding  challenges  and 
describing 
opportunities 
legal 
implementation in Latvia. The purpose of this report is to 
provide information on the implementation performance 
and  highlight  the  most  effective  ways  to  address  the 
implementation gaps  that  impact human health and  the 
environment and hamper the economic development and 
competitiveness  of  the  country.  The  report  relies  on 
detailed  sectoral  implementation  reports  collected  or 
issued  by  the  Commission  under  specific  environmental 
legislation. 

environmental 

regarding 

The  main  challenges  set  out  below  have  been  selected 
from  Part I  of  this  report,  ‘Thematic  areas’,  taking  into 
consideration 
factors  such  as  the  gravity  of  the 
environmental implementation issue in light of the impact 
on the quality of life of citizens, the distance to target and 
financial implications. 

Latvia  faces  significant  challenges  in  transitioning  to  a 
circular  economy,  requiring  urgent  action  to  boost  its 
circular  material  use  rate,  fully  implement  its  policy 
framework  and  adopt  upstream  circularity  measures. 
While  progress  has  been  made  with  initiatives  like  the 
deposit  system  for  beverage  packaging,  introduction  of 
extended producer responsibility system for new and used 
textile products and updates to green public procurement, 
municipal waste recycling and biowaste collection remain 
key weaknesses. Despite a municipal waste recycling rate 
of 51 % in 2022, close to the EU-27 average, Latvia risks 
falling  short  of  the  2035  landfill  reduction  goal  of  10%, 
with 44 % of municipal waste still being landfilled.  

Latvia, known for its rich natural capital, with vast forests 
and abundant water resources, often takes its biodiversity 
for granted and lacks a national biodiversity strategy and 
sufficient  investments  to  protect  and  restore  its  natural 
logging  and  peat 
capital.  Economic 
extraction often overshadow biodiversity goals. Less than 
10 % of protected habitats have favourable conservation 
status  and  habitats  such  as  semi-natural  grasslands, 
forests,  bogs,  and  coastal  habitats  are  declining  due  to 

interests 

like 

land-use  change  and  pressures  from  forestry  and 
agriculture. While Latvia has mapped all  its  habitats and 
species, it has yet to expand the Natura 2000 network and 
faces  criticism  for  afforesting  degraded  peatlands,  a 
practice that undermines climate goals and sustainability. 
Drained  peatlands  contribute  disproportionately  to 
greenhouse  gas  emissions,  while  clear-cutting  caused 
significant  loss  of  some  forest  habitats  outside  Natura 
2000 areas before they could be designated as habitats of 
community importance. 

As  to  water  pollution,  the  assessment  of  the  3rd  river 
basin management plans shows some improvement in the 
ecological  status  of  surface  water  bodies  and  a 
deterioration  in  their  chemical  status  compared  to  the 
previous reporting period. 

Latvia's land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) 
sector has become a net greenhouse gas emitter in recent 
years. High emissions from cropland and grassland suggest 
significant  emissions  from  organic-rich  soils  such  as 
drained peatlands and decreasing forest stocks, which are 
the main drivers of LULUCF emissions in the country. 

The  overall  environmental  investment  needs  to  enable 
Latvia  to  meet  its  objectives  in  the  areas  of  pollution 
prevention  and  control,  circular  economy  and  waste, 
water protection and management, and biodiversity and 
ecosystems  is  estimated  to  be  EUR 2 billion  per  year.  A 
significant  part  of  the  estimated  requirement,  around 
EUR 1 billion  per  year,  can  be  attributed  to  the  need  to 
support  biodiversity  and  ecosystems.  The  current 
environmental  investment  gap  in  Latvia  stands  at  an 
estimated  EUR 1.2 billion  per  year,  representing  around 
3 %  of  the  national  gross  domestic  product,  being 
considerably higher than the EU average (0.77 %). 

to 

to 

legal  standing 

On  environmental  governance,  Latvia  provides  broad 
the  public  regarding 
rights 
environmental  matters.  With  environmental 
impact 
assessment report preparation completed within 6 to 18 
months  and  the  official  decision  and  explanation  from 
authorities about the environmental impacts of a project 
finalized in as little as two months, Latvia has one of the 
in  the  EU. 
fastest 
the  administrative  capacity  of  Latvia's 
Enhancing 
environmental 
for  better 
implementation  of  EU  environmental  policies  and 
increased absorption of EU funding and technical support.

impact  assessment  procedures 

authorities 

crucial 

is 

(1) 

from 

the  Commission 

the  European 
Communication 
Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions –  Delivering  the 
benefits  of  EU  environmental  policies  through  a  regular 

to 

implementation  review,  COM(2016) 316 
environmental 
final  of  27 May  2016,  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2016%3A316%3AFIN. 

Environmental Implementation Review 2025 – Latvia 

 
 
Part I: Thematic areas 

1. Circular economy and waste management

Transitioning to a circular economy 

Figure 1: CMUR (%), 2013–2023 

Latvia  4 

Advancing the transition to a circular economy in the EU 
will reduce the environmental and climate impact of our 
industrial  systems  by  reducing  input  materials,  keeping 
products and materials in the loop for longer and reducing 
waste generation, thus decoupling economic growth from 
circular  economy  has 
resource 
considerable  potential  to  increase  competitiveness  and 
job creation and will also promote innovation and provide 
access to new markets.  With the 2020 circular  economy 
action  plan  (CEAP) (2)  measures  either 
in  place  or 
legislatively  advanced,  Member  States  will  now  have  to 
focus on a swift and effective implementation. 

consumption.  A 

The 2020 CEAP launched the legislative process for a set 
of  initiatives  that  will  now  have  to  be  implemented  by 
national  governments  across  the  EU.  These  initiatives 
were all introduced following a holistic life-cycle approach, 
with  measures  addressing  the  different  stages  of  a 
product’s life cycle, from design through use to end of life. 

In the CEAP, the EU sets as its overarching objective the 
doubling of its circular material use rate (CMUR) by 2030. 

The CMUR is a  measure of one aspect of circularity: the 
share of the total amount of material used in the economy 
that is accounted for by recycled waste.  A higher CMUR 
value means that more secondary materials were used as 
a  substitute  for  raw  materials,  thus  reducing  the 
environmental impacts of extracting primary material. 

Latvia’s circular use of material has been relatively steady 
since the initial decline from its highest point in 2016. The 
rate stood at 5 % in 2023, well below the EU average of 
11.8 % (Figure 1). 

15

10

5

0

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

Latvia

EU-27

Source: Eurostat, ‘Circular material use rate’, env_ac_cur,  last updated 
13 November 
2024, 
accessed 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/product/view/env_ac_cur. 

9 December 

2024, 

Resource  productivity  measures  the  total  amount  of 
materials directly used by an economy in relation to gross 
domestic product (GDP). Improving resource productivity 
can help to minimise negative impacts on the environment 
and reduce dependency on volatile raw material markets. 
As  shown  in  Figure 2,  with  EUR 0.9  generated  per  kg  of 
material consumed in 2023, Latvia’s resource productivity 
is less than half the EU average of EUR 2.23 per kg. 

Figure 2:  Resource  productivity  (EUR/kg),  2013–2023

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

0,5

0,0

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

Latvia

EU-27

NB: The unit of measurement used is EUR/kg chain-linked volume (2015). 
Chain-linked  volumes  focus  on  changes  on  quantities  and  prices  of 
commodities  in  previous  years,  taking  account  of  inflation,  and  are 
indexed to the nearest appropriate year, in this case 2015. 

Source:  Eurostat,  ‘Resource  productivity’,  env_ac_rp,  last  updated 
7 August 
2024, 
accessed 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/product/view/env_ac_rp. 

9 December 

2024, 

(2) 

from 

the  Commission 

the  European 
Communication 
Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions –  A  new  circular 
economy action plan for a cleaner and more competitive Europe, 

to 

COM(2020) 98 
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2020%3A98%3AFIN. 

11 March 

2020, 

final 

of 

https://eur-

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Policies and measures 

In  parallel  with  European  initiatives  under  the  CEAP, 
Member States are encouraged to adopt and implement 
circular strategies at the national, regional and city levels. 
These should be tailored to each national and local reality, 
to  harness  the  proximity  economy’s (3)  potential,  while 
following  the  principles  of  a  holistic  whole-value-chain 
approach. 

Since the launch of the online European Circular Economy 
Stakeholder  Platform  in  2017 (4)  national,  regional  and 
local  authorities  have  used  the  platform  to  share  their 
strategies,  roadmaps  and  good  practices,  for  example 
alternative business models and innovative technologies. 

In September 2020, Latvia adopted its action plan for the 
transition  to  a  circular  economy  for  2021–2027 (5).  The 
plan  contains  seven  initiatives  to  be  implemented  by 
2027: transitioning from waste to resource management, 
improving 
establishing 
preconditions for the reuse of goods, promoting services 
over goods, focusing on priority sectors, strengthening the 
role  of  local  authorities  and  engaging  and  informing  the 
public. 

productivity, 

resource 

The  implementation  of  the  action  plan  has  started,  and 
several  measures  have  been  adopted.  These  include  a 
deposit system for beverage packaging, a law on reducing 
the  consumption  of  plastic  products,  and  end-of-waste 
criteria for new waste categories. 

Latvia is currently establishing a committee to oversee the 
implementation of the plan. 

Green public procurement 

Public  procurement  accounts  for  a  large  proportion  of 
European 
authorities’ 
consumption,  with  public 
purchasing  power  representing  around  14 %  of  EU  GDP. 
Public  procurement  using  green  or  circular  criteria  (life-
cycle analysis, PaaS (platform as a service), second hand) 
can help drive the demand for sustainable products that 
meet reparability and recyclability standards. 

Public procurement in Latvia accounts for 15.3 % of GDP 
and green public procurement (GPP) accounts for 2.3 % of 
Latvia’s GDP (6). In 2023, the proportion of GPP was 15 % 

Latvia  5 

in financial terms (down from 29.9 % in 2022) and 11.9 % 
in  terms  of  the  share  of  the  total  number  of  all  public 
purchases (down from 14.7 % in 2022). 

On 1 August 2023, amendments to the Cabinet Regulation 
on  GPP (7)  came  into  force,  introducing  changes  to 
requirements  in  five  mandatory  categories.  The  most 
significant updates included mandatory GPP requirements 
for  two  new  groups:  construction  of  third-category 
buildings as of 2024, and light passenger and commercial 
vehicles  as  of  August  2023.  These  groups,  due  to  their 
substantial financial impact, were moved from voluntary 
to  mandatory  application,  which  is  expected  to  improve 
the statistical GPP indicators in the coming years. 

The EU Ecolabel and the eco-management and audit 
scheme 

The  number  of  EU  Ecolabel  product  groups  and  the 
number  of  eco-management  and  audit  scheme  (EMAS)-
licensed  organisations  in  each  country  provide  some 
indication  of  the  extent  to  which  the  private  sector  and 
national stakeholders in that country are actively engaged 
in the transition to a circular economy. The EU Ecolabel is 
awarded  to  products  with  best-in-class  environmental 
is  a  voluntary  environment 
performance.  EMAS 
management 
the 
scheme 
environmental impacts of organisations. 

reducing 

aimed 

at 

As  of  September  2024,  Latvia  had  929  products  out  of 
98 977,  and  6  licences  out  of  2 983  registered  in  the  EU 
Ecolabel scheme, which shows very low take-up and only 
a slight increase from the previous report (8). Latvia is the 
only  Member  State  with  no  organisations  actively 
registered in EMAS (9). 

The CMUR of Latvia increased by 0.5 percentage points in 
2023.  This  represents  some  progress  towards  the  2022 
priority action to take measures to increase the rate. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

Speed up the transition to a circular economy by 
implementing an updated national strategy and 
the  EU  framework  and  recommendations,  in 
particular  to  complement 
it  with  upstream 
circularity measures. 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

website, 

Economy 

Commission 

European Commission, ‘Proximity and social economy ecosystem’, 
European 
https://single-market-
economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/proximity-and-social-
economy_en. 
Circular 
(https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/en/strategies). 
https://likumi.lv/ta/id/317168-par-ricibas-planu-parejai-uz-
aprites-ekonomiku-20202027-gadam. 
īstenošanu  valsts 
Cabinet  of  Ministers,  Par  zaļā 
pārvaldē  2023.  gadā 
implementation  of  green 
[On  the 
procurement  in  public  administration  in  2023],  information 
report,  2024,  https://likumi.lv/ta/id/352388-par-zala-iepirkuma-

Stakeholder 

iepirkuma 

Platform 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

istenosanu-valsts-parvalde-2023-gada. 
https://likumi.lv/ta/id/343571-grozijumi-ministru-kabineta-2017-
gada-20-junija-noteikumos-nr-353-prasibas-zalajam-publiskajam-
iepirkumam-un-to-piemerosanas-ka.... 
European Commission, ‘EU Ecolabel facts and figures’, European 
Commission 
2025, 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/facts-and-
figures.html. 
‘Published 
As  of  October  2024.  European  Commission, 
organisations’,  EMAS  Register,  accessed  4 February  2025, 
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/emas2/public/registration/list. 

4 February 

accessed 

website, 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
•  Adopt measures to increase the CMUR. 

Latvia  6 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
Latvia  7 

Waste management 

Turning waste into a resource is supported by: 

(i)  addressing  the  full  life  cycle  of  products,  from 
conception to end of life, by setting requirements on 
the design of products to ensure that they are more 
sustainable; 

12 years covered, with an overall significant increase. No 
conclusions on the decoupling of waste generation from 
economic development can, however, be drawn from the 
available data. 

Figure 3: Generation of waste (total and excluding major 
mineral waste), population and GDP, 2010–202210 

(ii)  fully 

implementing  EU  waste 

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

(iii)  reducing waste generation per capita and in absolute 

terms; 

(iv)  increasing  the  recycling  rates  of  waste  containing 
critical raw materials (CRMs), with a view to reducing 
dependencies and building resilient value chains, and 
stimulating  demand  for  recycled  content 
in  all 
products; 

(v)  limiting energy recovery to non-recyclable materials; 

and 

(vi)  phasing  out  landfilling  of  recyclable  or  recoverable 

waste. 

One  of  the  main  objectives  of  the  EU  Waste  Law  is  to 
decouple  economic  growth  from 
its  environmental 
impacts. 

The EU’s approach to waste management is based on the 
waste  treatment  hierarchy:  prevention,  preparing  for 
reuse,  recycling,  recovery  and,  as  the  least  preferred 
option,  disposal 
landfilling  and 
includes 
incineration without energy recovery). 

(which 

All legislative proposals in the field of waste management 
put forward by the Commission since 2021 are intended 
to encourage Member States to promote better product 
design,  to  require  producers  to  cover  the  costs  of 
managing the waste resulting from their products and to 
ensure that waste is managed at the higher levels of the 
waste hierarchy. 

The total amount of waste generated in Latvia increased 
considerably  between  2010  and  2014,  then  decreased 
until 2018 and significantly increased after that (Figure 3). 
Waste  generation  in  Latvia  has  fluctuated  heavily  in  the 

‘GDP  and  main  components 

(10)   Sources:  Eurostat, 
(output, 
expenditure  and  income)’,  nama_10_gdp,  accessed  15 October  2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/nama_10_gdp__cust
om_9301905/default/table;  Eurostat,  ‘Generation  of  waste  by  waste 
category,  hazardousness  and  NACE  Rev. 2  activity’,  env_wasgen,  last 
updated 
2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/env_wasgen/default/
table?lang=en; Eurostat, ‘Population change – Demographic balance and 
crude  rates  at  national  level’,  demo_grind,  accessed  15 October  2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/demo_gind/default/t
able?lang=en&category=demo.demo_ind. 

30 September 

22 October 

accessed 

2024, 

NB: Waste generation data for odd years are interpolated. 

Critical raw materials 

Latvia does not keep specific records of waste containing 
CRMs. 

Construction and demolition waste 

Construction  and  demolition  waste  accounts  for  almost 
40 % of all waste generated in the EU. A recent study (11) 
by  the  Joint  Research  Centre  shows  that  recycling  and 
preparation for reuse are preferred over incineration and 
landfilling from an environmental perspective for most of 
the  different  streams  of  construction  and  demolition 
waste.  However,  the  economics  are  often  unfavourable 
for  recycling  and  preparation  for  reuse  and  recycling 
compared  with  incineration  and  landfilling.  If  available 
technology  were  to  be  applied,  it  is  estimated  that  the 
increase in recycling and preparation for reuse would lead 
to an additional 33 Mt of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission 
savings annually (more than, for example, the combined 
annual  GHG  emissions 
from  Estonia,  Latvia  and 
Luxembourg). 

The rate of recycling and preparation for reuse of mineral 
construction and demolition waste in  Latvia in 2022 was 
87 %, compared with the EU average of 79.8 %. Measures 
to further increase the rate of recycling and preparation 
for  reuse  of  construction  and  demolition  waste  include 
separate collection at  the  source – for instance, through 
(‘resource 
digitalised 

pre-demolition 

audits (12) 

(11) 

(12) 

European Commission: Joint Research Centre, Cristobal Garcia, J., 
Caro, D. et al., Techno-economic and environmental assessment of 
construction and demolition waste management in the European 
Union,  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg, 
2024, 
https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC1354
70. 
European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Internal  Market, 
Industry,  Entrepreneurship  and  SMEs,  EU  Construction  & 
Demolition Waste Management Protocol including guidelines for 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
assessments’); extended producer responsibility (EPR) and 
other  economic  instruments;  and  upstream  measures 
such  as  increasing  the  recycled  content  in  construction 
products and the circular design (13) of construction works. 

Boosting implementation – the 2023 Waste Early 
Warning Report 

This  section  focuses  on  the  management  of  municipal 
waste (14),  for  which  EU  law  sets  mandatory  recycling 
targets.  In  June  2023,  the  Commission  published  the 
Waste  Early  Warning  Report (15)  identifying  the  general 
trends in waste management and the Member States at 
risk of missing 2025 waste targets (see Figure 4). Latvia is 
at  risk  of  missing  the  preparing  for  reuse  and  recycling 
target  for municipal waste  but  not  at  risk  of missing the 
recycling target for packaging waste. Latvia is also at risk 
of not meeting the 2035 target of a maximum of 10 % of 
municipal waste being landfilled. 

Figure 4:  Member  States’  prospects  of  meeting  the 
preparing  for  reuse  and  recycling  targets  for  municipal 
waste and packaging waste 

Member  States  not  at  risk  of  missing  the  55 % 
preparing  for  reuse  and  recycling  target  for 

Latvia  8 

municipal waste and the 65 % recycling target for 
packaging waste 

Member States at risk of missing the preparing for 
reuse and recycling target for municipal waste but 
not  at  risk  of  missing  the  recycling  target  for 
packaging waste 

Member States at risk of missing both targets 

Outside coverage 

Source: European Environment Agency (EEA), ‘Many EU Member States 
not on track to meet recycling targets for municipal waste and packaging 
waste’, briefing No 28/2022, Copenhagen, 2023. Reference data © ESRI. 

Under  certain  conditions,  EU  waste  legislation  enables 
some  Member  States  to  postpone  the  deadlines  for 
reaching certain waste management targets for municipal 
and packaging waste. Member States that want to use this 
possibility  have  to  notify  the  Commission  24 months  in 
advance  of  the  deadline  and  submit  an  implementation 
plan  laying  down  the  steps  they  envisage  to  reach  the 
postponed targets within a new time frame. Regarding the 
2025 targets, 11 Member States, not including Latvia, have 
used this prerogative. 

In  the  Waste  Early  Warning  Report,  the  Commission 
recommended  that  Member  States  accelerate  their 
efforts  to  improve  their  recycling  performance.  The 
Commission  is,  on  one  hand,  working  together  with  the 
national  authorities  and  stakeholders  to  speed  up  the 
implementation  of  measures  necessary  to  meet  the 
targets,  including  through  dedicated  financing.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Commission  is  pursuing  enforcement 
actions against those Member States that, based on data 
submitted to the Commission, do not achieve the targets 
of the Waste Framework Directive (16), the Packaging and 
Packaging Waste Directive (17) and the Directive on Waste 
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (18). 

As Latvia also failed to attain the municipal waste recycling 
target for 2021 set out in the Waste Framework Directive, 
a  letter  of  formal  notice  was  sent  to  it  on  25 July  2025. 
However, as Latvia informed the Commission, this target 
was achieved for 2022. 

pre-demolition and pre-renovation audits of construction works – 
Updated edition 2024, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg,  2024,  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/d63d5a8f-64e8-11ef-a8ba-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en. 
European Commission, Circular Economy – Principles for buildings 
2020, 
Brussels, 
design, 
https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/39984. 

(13) 

(14)  Municipal  waste  consists  of  (i)  mixed  waste  and  separately 
collected waste from households, including paper and cardboard, 
glass, metals, plastics, biowaste, wood, textiles, packaging, waste 
electrical  and  electronic  equipment,  waste  batteries  and 
accumulators,  and  bulky  waste, 
including  mattresses  and 
furniture;  and  (ii)  mixed  waste  and  separately  collected  waste 
from  other  sources,  where  such  waste  is  similar  in  nature  and 

composition  to  waste  from  households  (Directive  2008/98/EC, 
Article 3.2b). 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/waste-early-
warning-report_en. 

(15) 

(16)   Directive  2008/98/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  19  November  2008  on  waste  and  repealing  certain 
Directives, Directive - 2008/98 - EN - Waste framework directive - 
EUR-Lex. 

(17)  Directive  2012/19/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  4 July  2012  on  waste  electrical  and  electronic 
equipment  (WEEE)  (OJ  L 197,  24.7.2012,  p. 38),  Directive  - 
2012/19 - EN - EUR-Lex. 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32012L0019. 

(18) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Municipal waste 

Figure 6: Recycling (including preparation for reuse) and 
landfill rates (%), 2010–2022 

Latvia  9 

Latvia’s municipal waste generation has mostly increased 
over  the  past  decade  (Figure 5).  In  2022,  the  country 
generated 464 kg of municipal waste per capita, which is 
significantly below the estimated EU-27 average of 513 kg 
per capita. 

Latvia has a recycling rate of 51 %, which is very close to 
the  EU-27  average  of  49 %.  The  preparing  for  reuse  and 
recycling rate increased strongly, from 9 % in 2010 to 51 % 
in 2022 (Figure 6) (19). 

The landfill rate has decreased steadily since 2010 and, in 
2022,  44 %  of  Latvia’s  municipal  waste  was  still  being 
landfilled,  while 
incineration  played  a  minor  role. 
However, the absolute volumes of municipal waste sent to 
landfill remained fairly stable. 

In 2024, Latvia introduced bio-waste collection providing 
residents with separate bio-waste containers, but not yet 
sufficiently,  and  local  governments  continue  to  work  on 
this issue.   

Additionally,  as  of  July  2024,  Latvia 
introduced  an 
extended producer responsibility system for new and used 
textile products,20 thus contributing to their recycling and 
promoting sustainable practices. 

Figure 5:  Municipal  waste  management  and  recycling 
(including preparation for reuse), 2010–2022 

NB: The reporting methodology for waste exported for recycling changed 
in  2019.  As  of  reference  year  2020,  new  reporting  rules  apply  to 
calculating recycled municipal waste pursuant to the targets laid down in 
Article 11(2)(c–e)  of  Directive  2008/98/EC.  Latvia  has  applied  the  new 
calculation rules since 2020. 

Source: Eurostat, ‘Municipal waste by waste management operations’, 
env_wasmun, accessed 22 October 2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ENV_WASMUN/defa
ult/table. 

Packaging waste 

Latvia’s  packaging  waste  generation  has  significantly 
increased  since  2010  (Figure 7).  The  country  generated 
153 kg per capita in 2022, which is significantly below the 
estimated  European  average  of  186 kg  per  capita  in  the 
same year (21). 

Figure 7: Packaging waste generation, 2010–2022 

Source:  Eurostat,  ‘Municipal  waste  by  waste  management  operations’, 
env_wasmun, 
2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ENV_WASMUN/defa
ult/table. 

22 October 

accessed 

(19) 

EEA,  Early  warning  assessment  related  to  the  2025  targets  for 
municipal  and  packaging  waste –  Latvia,  Copenhagen,  2022, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/many-eu-member-
states/latvia/view. 

20  
(21) 

Cabinet Regulations No. 359 dd. 11.06.2024.  
The  EU  average  might  have  been  influenced by  not  all  Member 
States fully  applying  the  reporting  rules for  packaging  waste  set 
out in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/665. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Source: Eurostat, ‘Packaging waste by waste management operations’, 
env_waspac, last updated 23 October 2024, accessed 28 October 2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ENV_WASPAC__cust
om_842634/default/table?lang=en. 
Latvia’s  overall  packaging  waste  recycling  rate  has 
increased  since  2010  (Figure 8),  reaching  61 %  in  2022. 
The  recycling  rate  is  mainly  driven  by  the  recycling  of 
paper and cardboard, wooden and glass packaging waste, 
as  these  types  of  waste  make  up  the  largest  shares  of 
overall packaging waste. The recycling rates for paper and 
cardboard  and  glass  packaging  waste  were  at  the  same 
high level of 78 %. 

The  recycling  rate  for  plastic  packaging  increased  from 
24 %  in  2010  to  47 %  in  2022,  but  stagnated  from  2020 
onwards. From reference year 2020 onwards, it has been 
mandatory  to  report  steel  and  aluminium  packaging 
separately.  The  recycling  rate  of  steel  packaging  waste 
exceeded  the  2025  target,  while  the  rate  for  aluminium 
packaging  waste  dropped  below  the  target  in  2022  (to 
30 %). 

Figure 8: Packaging waste recycling rates (%), 2010–2022 

Source: Eurostat, ‘Packaging waste by waste management operations’, 
env_waspac, last updated 23 October 2024, accessed 28 October 2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ENV_WASPAC__cust
om_842634/default/table?lang=en. 

Policies to encourage waste prevention 

Waste  management  plans  and  waste  prevention 
programmes are instrumental to the full implementation 
of  EU  waste  legislation.  They  set  out  key  provisions  and 
investments to ensure compliance with existing and new 
legal requirements (e.g. on waste prevention, on separate 
collection for certain waste streams, on recycling and on 
landfill targets). 

Latvia  has  a  national  waste  prevention  programme  that 
covers 2021–2028 and has four main objectives. These are 
preventing waste generation, ensuring the rational use of 
waste as a resource, reducing the hazardousness of waste 
and reducing waste disposal (EEA, 2023). 

Priority  waste  streams  for  waste  prevention  are  food 
waste, household waste, hazardous waste, electrical and 

Latvia  10 

electronic  equipment,  textiles,  furniture,  packaging, 
building materials and construction products. 

Latvia has also developed a strategy for circular economy: 
the action plan for the transition to a circular economy for 
2020–2027. 

Since  Latvia’s  national  waste  prevention  programme  is 
integrated into the national waste management plan, the 
funding also follows this approach and no specific budget 
is assigned to the implementation of the waste prevention 
measures.  The  funding  comes  from 
investments  by 
economic  operators,  waste  producers  and  operators  as 
well as waste management fees and EU funds. 

Policies to encourage separate collection and recycling 

Latvia  has  not  implemented  a  pay-as-you-throw  (PAYT) 
system  at  the  national  level.  PAYT  is  currently  only 
implemented 
in  Latvia.  Several 
municipalities  have  already  assessed  the  potential  of 
introducing  PAYT  and  concluded  that  it  would  be  too 
expensive. 

in  one  municipality 

Bring  point  collection  is  the  predominant  collection 
system in Latvia for all recyclables, as well as for residual 
waste.  Except  for  food  waste,  all  waste  streams  are 
collected separately at bring points and civic amenity sites. 
There  is  also  door-to-door  commingled  collection  of 
recyclables  in  some  rural  areas,  where  the  population 
density is too low for the arrangement of bring points. 

Waste  from  electrical  and  electronic  equipment 
is 
collected both at civic amenity sites and through take back 
schemes at retailers. 

in  only  a 

is  collected  separately 

Biowaste 
few 
municipalities.  In  general,  residents  are  provided  with 
means of separate collection for biowaste, but this is not 
yet sufficient, and local governments are continuing work 
on  this  issue.  Municipalities  also  support  citizens  with 
home composting by providing containers. 

Separate collection is mandatory for waste collected from 
all  household  and  non-household  sources.  In  Latvia,  the 
collection  currently  does  not  distinguish  between 
packaging waste and non-packaging waste. 

Latvia  has  an  EPR  system  in  place,  covering  packaging 
waste  from  both  household  and  non-household  sources 
for  all  packaging  materials.  However,  Latvia  has  no 
advanced fee modulation. Latvia applies packaging taxes 
to all types of packaging waste. 

There is also a newly established deposit return system for 
plastic,  aluminium  and  glass  beverage  packaging,  which 
was  expanded  to  cover  additional  types  of  beverage 
packaging in 2023. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  11 

Policies to discourage landfilling or incineration 

Latvia has introduced an escalator system to increase the 
landfill tax on municipal waste. The tax also covers outputs 
of  mechanical  biological  treatment  plants  that  are 
landfilled.  The  tax  is  considerably  higher  than  the  EU 
average.  Latvia  is  also  planning  to  introduce  a  ban  on 
landfilling  municipal  waste  suitable  for  preparation  for 
reuse,  recycling  or  recovery  as  of  2030.  Latvia  has  an 
incineration tax. 

60 % of the resource tax revenue from waste disposal is 
paid into the basic state budget and 40 % is paid into the 
basic  budget  of  the  local  municipality  where  the  waste 
disposal takes place. 

Latvia has made some progress on setting up the separate 
collection  of  waste,  including  biowaste,  and  the  review 
and/or  harmonisation of  minimum  service  standards  for 
separate  collection  to  ensure  high  capture  rates  of 
recyclable  waste.  However,  it  has  made  no  progress  on 
setting mandatory recycling targets for municipalities and 
using  measures  to  tackle  non-compliance  (e.g.  fines). 

implementation 

support  programmes 

Latvia  has  also  made  no  progress  in  developing  and 
running 
for 
municipalities to help support efforts to organise separate 
collection  and  improve  recycling  performance.  Finally, 
there was no progress made in improving the functioning 
of  EPR  systems,  in  line  with  the  general  minimum 
requirements in the Waste Framework Directive. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Improve  separate  collection  at  source,  e.g.  through 
economic instruments, investing in infrastructure for 
separate  collection,  sorting  and  recycling,  and 
increasing public awareness. 
Improve  municipal  waste  preparation  for  reuse  and 
recycling. 
Invest  in  waste  prevention  measures  to  reduce  the 
total amount of waste generated. 
Ensure  the  achievement  of  the  2025  waste  targets, 
following 
the 
Commission in the Early Warning Report. 

the  recommendations  made  by 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
2. Biodiversity and natural capital

Global and EU biodiversity frameworks

Latvia  12 

Biological  diversity  and  healthy  ecosystems  are  critical 
for our societies, underpin our economies and well-being 
and  are  essential  for  climate  change  adaptation  and 
mitigation.  The  Kunming–Montreal  global  biodiversity 
framework  (GBF),  adopted  in  December  2022,  sets 
comprehensive  and  measurable  targets  to  tackle 
biodiversity  loss  by  2030.  To  implement  this  global 
framework and integrate biodiversity considerations into 
national decision-making, the EU – as well as all Member 
States –  had  to  submit  national  biodiversity  strategies 
and action plans (NBSAPs), or to communicate national 
targets  aligned  with  the  global  targets,  by  the  end  of 
2024. The EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 (BDS) aims to 
put EU biodiversity on a path to recovery by 2030. It sets 
quantified targets intended to protect and restore nature 
and manage ecosystems in a sustainable manner, as well 
as  measures 
and 
commitments  to  support  global  biodiversity.  A  BDS 
actions  tracker (22)  and  a  dashboard  of  indicators (23) 
provide  information  on  implementation  progress.  The 
recently adopted EU Nature Restoration Regulation (24) is 
the first EU-wide, comprehensive law of its kind and a key 
instrument  for  the  EU  to  deliver  on  the  global 
biodiversity targets for 2030. It lays down an overarching 
objective  at  the  EU  level  to  put  in  place  effective 
restoration measures on 20 % of EU land and sea by 2030 
and for all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050. To 
achieve this, it sets binding targets for Member States to 
restore and maintain ecosystems, as well as an effective 
implementation 
national 
restoration plans. 

implementation 

framework 

enable 

based 

on 

to 

The BDS is the main instrument used by the EU to deliver 
on  its  obligation  under  the  GBF.  The  Commission  has 
submitted  to  the  Convention  on  Biological  Diversity 
(CBD)  its  report  on  GBF-aligned  EU  targets  that  stem 
from the BDS and from other policy instruments under 
the European Green Deal. 

Member  States’  NBSAPs  need  to  provide  coherent 
frameworks  for  national  delivery  on  the  global  and  EU 
line  with  the  global 
2030  biodiversity  targets. 

In 

(22) 

(23) 

(24) 

Actions 

Tracker 

Strategy 

Strategy 

Biodiversity 

Biodiversity 

EU 
(https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/kcbd/actions-tracker/). 
EU 
(https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/kcbd/EUBDS2030-
dashboard/?version=1). 
Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of 
the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending 
Regulation  (EU)  2022/869  (OJ  L,  2024/1991,  29.7.2024), 
the 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj; 
law 
on 
Commission 

see  also 
the 

Dashboard 

page 

web 

obligations,  NBSAPs  should  also  include  a  biodiversity 
financing  plan  and  a  capacity-building  plan,  based  on 
needs  assessments,  as  well  as  an  overview  of  the 
national indicators used to measure progress. 

The  Commission  encourages  Latvia  to  adopt  an  NBSAP 
aligned with the global biodiversity objectives, as there is 
in  Latvia.  The  2021–2027 
currently  no  NBSAP 
environmental  policy  guidelines (25)  contain  a  short 
chapter  on  biodiversity  (Chapter 6),  with  two  key 
objectives:  conservation  of  biodiversity  and  valuable 
landscapes,  and  preservation  and  management  of 
natural  capital.  The  guidelines  state  that,  in  the  last 
decade,  biodiversity 
to 
deteriorate due to the intensification of land use, land-
use change and fragmentation of ecosystems. 

in  Latvia  has  continued 

The EU aims to allocate to biodiversity objectives at least 
7.5 % of annual spending under the EU budget in 2024, 
rising  to  10 %  in  2026  and  2027.  For  more  details  on 
biodiversity  financing  and  investments  for  Latvia,  see 
‘Biodiversity and ecosystems’ in Chapter 5. 

2025 priority action 

• 

Submit  to  the  CBD  an  updated  NBSAP  or 
national  targets  following  the  adoption  of  the 
Kunming-Montreal 
Biodiversity 
Framework. 

Global 

Nature protection and restoration – Natura 
2000 

Natura  2000 (26),  the  largest  coordinated  network  of 
protected areas in the world, is key to the achievement 
of  the  objectives  set  out  in  the  Birds  and  Habitats 
Directives. These objectives are to ensure the long-term 
protection,  conservation  and  survival  of  Europe’s  most 
valuable  and  threatened  species  and  habitats  and  the 
ecosystems  they  underpin.  Key  milestones  towards 
meeting  the  objectives  of  the  Birds  and  Habitats 
Directives  are  (i)  the  setting  up  of  a  complete  and 
coherent  Natura  2000  network;  (ii)  the  designation  of 

(https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-
biodiversity/nature-restoration-law_en). 
https://www.varam.gov.lv/lv/vides-politikas-pamatnostadnes-
2021-2027-gadam. 

(25) 

(26)  Natura  2000  comprises  sites  of  community  importance  (SCIs), 
designated pursuant to the Habitats Directive, as well as special 
protection  areas  (SPAs),  classified  pursuant  to  the  Birds 
Directive. Numbers of protected areas in Figure 9 do not add up 
to  the  total  of  SCIs  plus  SPAs,  because  some  SCIs  and  SPAs 
overlap. An SAC is an SCI designated by a Member State. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  13 

legally  protects  18.1 %  of  its  terrestrial  area  (EU-27 
coverage: 26.1 %) and 15.8 % of its marine area (EU-27 
coverage: 12.3 %) (32). 

Figure 9:  Natura  2000  terrestrial  protected  area 
coverage per Member State (%), 2023 

sites of community importance (SCIs) as special areas of 
conservation (SACs) (27); and (iii) effective management 
of  all  Natura  2000  sites  through  the  setting  of  site-
specific conservation objectives and measures. 

Setting up a complete and coherent network of Natura 
2000 sites 

The  setting  up  of  a  complete  and  coherent  network  of 
Natura  2000  sites 
is  a  cornerstone  of  the  EU’s 
international commitments, under the BDS and GBF, to 
legally  protect  a  minimum  of  30 %  of  its  land  area  and 
30 % of its sea area by 2030. 

the 

these 

requires 

commitments 

Meeting 
full 
implementation of Article 3 of the Habitats Directive. The 
Natura 2000 network should represent a complete and 
coherent  ecological network composed of sites hosting 
natural habitat types and species of community interest. 
Natura 2000 will enable the natural habitat types and the 
species’ habitats concerned to be maintained or, where 
appropriate,  restored  to  a  favourable  conservation 
status in their natural range. 

Latvia  hosts  61  habitat  types (28)  and  109  species (29) 
covered by the Habitats Directive. The country also hosts 
81 bird taxa listed in the Birds Directive Annex I (30). 

As shown in Figure 9, in 2023, 11.5 % of Latvia’s territory 
was covered by Natura  2000 sites,  which  is  the  second 
smallest coverage in the EU (the EU average 18.6 %). The 
latest  assessment  of  SCIs  within  the  Natura  2000 
network  shows  that  there  are  insufficiencies  in  the 
coverage of Latvia’s Natura 2000 network. 

identified 

There are currently 333 Natura 2000 sites in Latvia. The 
insufficiencies 
latest  assessment 
indicate  that  Latvia  still  needs  to  complete  its  Natura 
2000  network.  An  infringement  procedure  has  been 
open since November 2019 (31). 

in  the 

Source: European Environment Agency (EEA), ‘Natura 2000 Barometer’, 
2023  data,  accessed  March  2025,  https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-
and-maps/dashboards/natura-2000-barometer. 

Designating special areas of conservation and setting 
site-specific conservation objectives and measures 

To  ensure  that  SCIs  contribute  to  the  objectives  of  the 
Habitats Directive, Member States must designate them 
as SACs, setting site-specific conservation objectives  (33) 
based on the ecological needs of the species and habitats 
present  on  the  sites.  Such  site-specific  conservation 
objectives  should  define  attributes  and  targets  that 
describe the habitats’ or species’ condition as favourable 
or  unfavourable,  addressing key  pressures  and threats. 
Under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, Member States 
must establish and implement measures to achieve these 
objectives.  

Considering  both  areas  covered  by  Natura  2000  and 
other  nationally  designated  protected  areas,  Latvia 

The  six-year  deadline  set  by  the  Habitats  Directive  to 
designate  SCIs  as  SACs  and  establish  appropriate 

(27) 

(28) 

(29) 

(30) 

SCIs are designated pursuant to the Habitats Directive, whereas 
SPAs are designated pursuant to the Birds Directive. Figures of 
coverage do not add up because some SCIs and SPAs overlap. 
European Environment Agency (EEA), ‘Number of habitats and 
species per Member State’, Article 17 dashboard, Annex I total, 
19 December 
2019, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/state-of-
nature-in-the-eu/article-17-national-summary-
dashboards/general-information-on-habitats-and-species. 
EEA,  ‘Number  of  habitats  and  species  per  Member  State’, 
Article 17 
2019, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/state-of-
nature-in-the-eu/article-17-national-summary-
dashboards/general-information-on-habitats-and-species. 
EEA,  ‘Number  of  bird  species/populations  per  Member  State’, 
Article 12 dashboard, Annex I total, last updated 11 May 2023, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/state-of-
nature-in-the-eu/article-12-national-summary-

19 December 

dashboard, 

dashboards/general-information-on-bird-species-populations. 
This  counting  only  takes  into  account  bird  taxa  for  which 
information 
was 
requested.https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/sta
te-of-nature-in-the-eu/article-12-national-summary-
dashboards/general-information-on-bird-species-populations 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/in

f_19_6304. 
 Eurostat dataset env_bio4, 2022 data, accessed 12 March 2025 

The site-specific conservation objectives define the conditions to 
be achieved by species (Article 1(i) of the Habitats Directive) and 
habitat  types  (Article 1(e)  of  the  Habitats  Directive)  within  the 
sites  in  order  to  maximise  the  contribution  of  the  sites  to 
achieving  favourable  conservation  status  at  the  national, 
biogeographical or European level. 

(31)

(32) 

(33) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
conservation objectives and measures has expired for all 
sites in Latvia. 

The  Commission  opened  an  infringement  procedure 
against Latvia in 2020 for its failure to designate SACs and 
set  appropriate  conservation  objectives  and  measures. 
The  infringement  procedure  is  ongoing  (a  reasoned 
opinion  was  issued  on  9 June  2021).  As  a  result,  Latvia 
has now fully designated all SACs, providing information 
on  the  location  and  the  species  and  habitat  types  for 
which the sites were designated. Additionally, Latvia is in 
the  process  of  setting  site-specific  conservation 
objectives  and  developing  the  necessary  conservation 
measures  for  all  SACs,  to  comply  with  the  ecological 
requirements  of  the  natural  habitat  types  and  species 
concerned. 

2025 priority actions 

• 
• 

Complete the Natura 2000 site designation process. 
Ensure the effective implementation of Natura 2000 
management  plans  and  sufficient  administrative 
capacity and financing both for Natura 2000 and the 
implementation  of 
the  Nature  Restoration 
Regulation.  Ensure  implementation  of  Prioritised 
Actions Framework 2021-2027 (PAFs). 

Recovery of species 

One  objective  set  by  the  BDS  is  that,  by  2030,  there 
should be no further deterioration in conservation trends 
or  the  status  of  any  protected  species.  The  BDS  also 
states  that  Member  States  should  ensure  that  at  least 
30 % of species not currently in favourable conservation 
status  achieve  that  status  or  show  progress  towards 
doing so (e.g. by exhibiting positive population dynamics 
or stable or increasing range and habitat size), by 2030. 
According  to  the  European  Environment  Agency  (EEA), 
based  on  reporting  required  under  Article 17  of  the 
Habitats Directive, a quarter of species in the EU were of 
good conservation status as of 2018 (34). 

One of the primary objectives of the Habitats Directive is 
the  maintenance  of  or  restoration  to  favourable 
conservation status of all species of community interest. 
Moreover, the Birds Directive also aims to ensure that all 
wild  birds  in  the  EU  enjoy  a  secure  status.  In  order  to 
achieve these objectives, it will be necessary to address 
key  pressures  and  threats.  The  Birds  Directive  and  the 
Habitats Directive lay down rules establishing site-based 
and species protection regimes to address these threats. 

EEA, State of Nature in the EU: Results from reporting under the 
Nature  Directives  2013–2018,  Publications  Office  of  the 
2020, 
European 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state-of-nature-in-
the-eu-2020. 

Luxembourg, 

Union, 

(34) 

(35)

Latvia  14 

Under  Article 17  of  the  Habitats  Directive,  Member 
States are required to report on the conservation status 
of  habitats  and  species  every  six  years.  The  current 
reporting cycle, covering the years 2019 to 2024, is due 
for submission in July 2025. Figures 10 and 11 show the 
latest available conservation status data. 

According  to  the  report  submitted  by  Latvia  on  the 
conservation  status  of  habitats  and  species  covered  by 
Article 17 of the Habitats Directive for 2013–2018, 82 % 
of  habitats  and  52.3 %  of  species  were  classified  as 
having unfavourable status. 

Regarding  birds,  41.3 %  of  breeding  species  showed 
short-term  increases  or  stable  population  trends  (for 
wintering species, this figure was 66.6 %). 

To  ensure  that  the  recovery  of  species  is  achieved  in 
Latvia,  the  Commission  opened  an  infringement  calling 
on Latvia to bring its national legislation into line with the 
Habitats Directive, especially as regards the protection of 
the  lynx.  Latvia  has  since  amended  its  legislation  to 
remove  the  lynx  from  the  list  of  huntable  species 
(Annex V)  and  included  it  in  the  national  list  of  strictly 
protected species (Annex IV). However, the Commission 
still considers the species system of Latvia not in line with 
the  requirements  of  the  directive  in  relation  to  its 
obligations under Articles 12 and 16 (35). The Commission 
therefore  issued  a  reasoned  opinion  in  October  2024 
calling on Latvia to bring its rules on species protection 
into line with the Habitats Directive (36). 

The  major  pressures  reported  for  habitats  and  species 
listed  under  the  Habitats  Directive  include  forestry, 
agriculture,  extraction  of  resources,  development, 
human-induced changes to water regimes, mixed source 
pollution and alien and problematic species. The major 
pressures  for  bird  species  are  agriculture,  forestry, 
development, natural processes and climate change. 

(36)

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/in

f_22_1769?msclkid=240d7077c24b11eca3f8b0c6ba5a4f12. 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/in

f_24_4561. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Figure 10:  Assessments  of  conservation  status  of 
habitats  for  the  2007–2012  and  2013–2018  reporting 
periods 

NB:  The  values  shown  for  2007–2012  and  2013–2018  are  not 
necessarily directly comparable because changes in area conservation 
status in a Member State may result from changes to methods or use 
of better data, rather than reflecting genuine changes. 

Latvia  15 

Source: EEA, ‘Conservation status and trends of habitats and species’, 
19 December 
2025, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/state-of-nature-in-
the-eu/article-17-national-summary-dashboards/conservation-status-
and-trends. 

accessed 

March 

2019, 

The fact that less than 10 % of protected habitats  have 
favourable conservation status and the downward trend 
compared  with the previous period indicate that Latvia 
faces significant challenges in protecting its biodiversity. 
All  semi-natural  grasslands,  more  than  90 %  of  forests, 
and most  bogs, mires, fens, dunes and coastal habitats 
still  have  unfavourable  status.  The  main  causes  are 
changes  in  land  use  and  pressures  from  forestry  and 
agriculture. 

As an example of good practice, Latvia, with the support 
of  the  financial  instrument  for  the  environment  (LIFE) 
programme, is implementing the LIFE integrated project 
‘Optimising  the  governance  and  management  of  the 
Natura  2000  protected  areas  network 
in  Latvia’ 
(LatviaNature)  (LIFE19 IPE/LV/000010) (37).  The  project 
has  a  budget  of  EUR 19.5 million  and  will  run  until  the 
end of 2028. As part of the project, the pilot programme 
‘Blooming meadows’ (38) was developed to increase the 
biodiversity 
valuable 
grasslands. This project was a finalist in the 2024 Natura 
2000  Awards  in  the  category  ‘Working  together  for 
nature’ for its work in relation to voluntary mechanisms 
for conservation on private land (39). 

biologically 

potentially 

in 

NB:  The  values  shown  for  2007–2012  and  2013–2018  are  not 
necessarily directly comparable because changes in area conservation 
status in a Member State may result from changes to methods or use 
of better data, rather than reflecting genuine changes. 

Source: EEA, ‘Conservation status and trends of habitats and species’, 
19 December 
2025, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity/state-of-nature-in-
the-eu/article-17-national-summary-dashboards/conservation-status-
and-trends. 

accessed 

March 

2019, 

Figure 11:  Assessments  of  conservation  status  of 
species  for  the  2007–2012  and  2013–2018  reporting 
periods 

(37) 
(38) 
(39) 

https://latvianature.daba.gov.lv/en/about/. 
https://latvianature.daba.gov.lv/ziedu-plavas/. 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/working-together-

improve-biodiversity-private-lands-natura-2000-latvia-2024-03-
14_en. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Latvia  16 

Another  project  that  concluded  at  the  end  of  2023, 
‘Restoration  of  EU  protected  habitats  and  species’ (40), 
co-funded  by  the  EU  Cohesion  Fund  and  Latvian  state 
budget,  helped  30  Natura  2000  sites  to  achieve 
favourable  conservation  status  for  their  habitats  and 
species.  Although  the  project’s  budget  was  rather 
modest (EUR 3.53 million), it covered a large area and a 
wide  range  of  activities,  and  was  a  good  example  of 
successful  nationwide  collaboration  between  state 
institutions,  state  enterprises  and  municipalities (41).  It 
can be upscaled and replicated in the context of national 
nature restoration plans. 

Latvia has proceeded with and finalised the mapping of 
all habitats and species; however, it has not  completed 
the  identification  of  new  sites  for  the  Natura  2000 
network  or  the  expansion  of  existing  sites.  Latvia  must 
address the insufficiencies that remain in its Natura 2000 
network. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

Strengthen  the  integration  of  biodiversity  actions 
into other policies, e.g. energy, agriculture, fisheries, 
forestry,  urban  and  infrastructure  planning  and 
sustainable  tourism,  and  promote  communication 
between stakeholders.  

—  restore  at  least  10 %  of  agricultural  area  to  have 

— 

high-diversity landscape features; and 
increase the area under organic farming to at least 
25 %. 

The “Vision for agriculture and food” (42), adopted by the 
European Commission in February 2025, sets a roadmap 
to  an  agri-food  system  that  is  attractive,  competitive, 
sustainable and fair for current and future generations. 
To  ensure  a  sustainable  future  for  EU  agriculture,  it  is 
crucial  that  these  four  priority  areas  are  pursued 
together,  and  that  public  and  private  support  are 
adequately targeted toward this objective. 

The  CAP  and  national  CAP  strategic  plans  are  key 
instruments  to  facilitate  and  strengthen  the  efforts  of 
European  farmers  to  protect  biodiversity  and  the 
environment  at 
large.  The  Commission  approved 
Member  States’  CAP  strategic  plans  in  2022  for  the 
programming period 2023-2027. The CAP is the  largest 
source  of  funding  dedicated  to  supporting  biodiversity 
and  plays  a  significant  role 
implementing  EU 
environmental policy. Strategic plans should continue to 
support  the  protection  of  soil,  water,  air  quality  and 
biodiversity.  

in 

•  Reinforce  action 

for  habitats  and  species 

in 
unfavourable  conservation  status,  for  example 
through 
increased 
restoration  measures, 
connectivity,  better  policy  coordination  and 
integration, and increased funding. 

Recovery of ecosystems 

Agricultural ecosystems 

The BDS works alongside the common agricultural policy 
(CAP) to support the transition to sustainable agriculture. 

The  strategy  has  set  five  common  agriculture-related 
targets for 2030, namely to: 

—  reduce by 50 % the overall use of – and risk from – 

chemical pesticides; 

—  reduce  by  50 %  the  use  of  more  hazardous 

pesticides; 

—  reduce  by  50 %  losses  of  nutrients  from  fertilisers 
(which  will result in a  20 % reduction in the use of 
fertilisers)  while  ensuring 
is  no 
deterioration of soil fertility; 

there 

that 

(40) 

(41) 

https://www.daba.gov.lv/lv/projekts/biotopu-un-sugu-
dzivotnu-atjaunosana. 
Led  by  the  Nature  Conservation  Agency  of  Latvia  and 
implemented in collaboration with 10 Latvian municipalities and 
2 enterprises: the joint stock company Latvia’s State Forests and 
the state enterprise Latvian State Roads. 

indicators 

certain  CAP 

While 
focus  on 
result 
interventions favouring sustainable agriculture practices 
that  regenerate  the  ecosystems,  the  impact  of  these 
measures  is  difficult  to  assess.  The  uptake  of  the  eco-
schemes is voluntary for farmers. 

The  utilised  agricultural  area  in  Latvia  increased  from 
1 840 900 ha in 2012 to 1 970 700 ha in 2023 (43). 

Landscape  features  are  small  fragments  of  non-
productive  and  typically –  but  not  exclusively –  semi-
natural vegetation present in or adjacent to agricultural 
land.  They  provide  ecosystem  services  and  support  for 
biodiversity.  The  indicator  ‘share  of  agricultural  land 
covered  with  landscape  features’  is  the  ratio  between 
the  area  covered  by  landscape  features  and  the  area 
land.  Based  on  the  Land 
covered  by  agricultural 
Use/Cover  Area  Frame  Survey 
landscape  features 
estimates, the share of agricultural land covered by non-
productive  landscape  features  in  Latvia  is  4.3 %,  below 
the EU average. At the EU level, landscape features cover 
5.6 % of agricultural land. 

(42)  https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-

(43) 

food/vision-agriculture-and-food_en  
Eurostat,  dataset  ‘Utilised  agricultural  area  by  categories’, 
tag00025, 
2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tag00025/de
fault/table?lang=en. 

5 December 

accessed 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
In  2024,  the  CAP  basic  regulations  were  amended (44) 
regarding, inter alia, the standards for good agricultural 
and  environmental  condition  (GAEC)  of  land.  These 
changes  removed  the  obligation  for  farmers  benefiting 
from CAP area-related support to have a minimum share 
of 3–4 % of non-productive area or landscape features in 
their farms. The amended regulations do not remove the 
obligation  under  the  GAEC  8  to  maintain  existing 
landscape features and set out an obligation for Member 
States to establish and provide support for eco-schemes 
covering  practices 
for  the  maintenance  of  non-
productive areas, such as land lying fallow, and for the 
establishment of new landscape features on arable land. 

The recently adopted Nature Restoration Regulation (45) 
focuses on the restoration of agricultural ecosystems and 
requires  Member  States  to  put  in  place  measures  that 
aim to achieve an increasing trend at the national level in 
at  least  two  out  of  three  indicators  for  agricultural 
ecosystems (46). One of these indicators is the ‘share of 
agricultural land with high-diversity landscape features’. 

Organic  farming  practices  are  highly  beneficial  to 
biodiversity. As shown in  Figure 12, it is estimated that 
15.88 % of Latvia’s land area is used for organic farming. 
This  is  higher  than  the  EU  average  of  10.50 % (47), 
meaning Latvia is contributing to achieving the target of 
25 % of the EU’s agricultural land being used for organic 
farming by 2030. 

Latvia  17 

Figure 12:  Share  of  total  utilised  agricultural  area 
occupied  by  organic  farming  per  Member  State  (%), 
2022 

Source:  Eurostat,  ‘Area  under  organic  farming’,  sdg_02_40,  accessed 
5 December 
2024, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/sdg_02_40/default/
table?lang=en. 

2025 priority action 
• 

Implement  environmental  eco-schemes  and  agri-
environmental  measures  and  practices  to  address 
the environmental needs of Latvia. 

Soil ecosystems 

Soil is an essential, finite and extremely fragile resource. 
Its  increasing  degradation  poses  a  threat  to  EU  food 
security  and  climate 
resilience,  adaptation  and 
mitigation. 

The EU soil strategy, adopted in November 2021, aims to 
support  soil  protection,  sustainable  soil  management 
and  the  restoration  of  degraded  soils  to  achieve  the 
Green  Deal  objectives  as  well  as  land  degradation 
neutrality by 2030. 

This entails: 

—  preventing further soil degradation; 
—  making  sustainable  soil  management  the  new 

normal; 

(44) 

(45) 

Regulation (EU) 2024/1468 of the European Parliament and of 
the  Council  of  14 May  2024  amending  Regulations  (EU) 
2021/2115 and (EU) 2021/2116 as regards good agricultural and 
environmental  condition  standards,  schemes  for  climate, 
environment  and  animal  welfare,  amendment  of  the  CAP 
strategic plans, review of the CAP strategic plans and exemptions 
from  controls  and  penalties  (OJ  L,  2024/1468,  24.5.2024), 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1468/oj. 
Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of 
the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending 
Regulation  (EU)  2022/869  (OJ  L,  2024/1991,  29.7.2024), 

(46) 

(47) 

in  cropland  mineral  soils’  and 

http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj. 
The  three  indicators  are  ‘grassland  butterfly  index’,  ‘stock  of 
‘share  of 
organic  carbon 
agricultural land with high-diversity landscape features’. 
This is based on the latest available information from Eurostat, 
which 
is  currently  under  review;  European  Commission, 
Agriculture biologique au sein de l’union européenne, factsheet, 
2024, 
Brussels, 
https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/c67458e
d-ec50-4762-ae68-341763ab93c2_fr?filename=factsheet-
organic-farning_fr.pdf&prefLang=en. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Latvia  18 

—  taking action for ecosystem restoration. 

ecosystems. 

The  proposed  directive  on  soil  monitoring  and 
resilience (48) aims to introduce the first comprehensive 
legislation on the protection of all soils in the EU. Should 
the  directive  be  adopted,  Member  States  will  have  to 
transpose  it  into  national  legislation  and  implement  it, 
starting  with  putting  in  place  the  governance  systems 
and a sound monitoring framework building on existing 
national  soil  monitoring  frameworks.  The  objective  of 
the  proposed  directive  is  to  provide  better  and  more 
comparable  soil  health  data  with  the  view  of  attaining 
healthy soils by 2050. 

In  Latvia,  there  are  10  of  the  grassland  habitat  types 
listed  in  Annex I to the Habitats Directive. According to 
the  report  produced  for  the  latest  reporting  period 
(2013–2018)  under  Article 17  of  the  Habitats  Directive, 
the  overall  assessments  of  all  grasslands  indicate  they 
have  an  unfavourable  conservation  status.  The  major 
pressures  on  and  threats  to  grasslands  are  agriculture, 
forestry,  development,  natural  processes,  alien  and 
problematic  species,  climate  change,  human-induced 
changes 
in  water  regimes,  and  energy  production 
processes. 

Degradation  of  soil  ecosystems  encompasses  several 
aspects. The proposed directive requires Member States 
to  assess  soil  health  according  to  a  set  of  common 
indicators  and  to  define  the  necessary  regeneration 
measures. The area of soil that is sealed is an important 
factor in monitoring land-use change and represents an 
important pressure on nature and biodiversity. Other soil 
issues  related  to  land degradation  are  soil  erosion,  soil 
compaction, 
soil 
contamination, soil salinisation and the presence in soil 
of  nitrogen  and  phosphorus  in  excess.  The  impact 
assessment accompanying the proposal, which builds on 
the data available in the EU Soil Observatory, points to 
the following soil degradation issues in Latvia (49). 

soil  organic 

loss  of 

carbon, 

The greatest  contributor to Latvia’s unhealthy soils is a 
high  or  very  high  susceptibility  to  topsoil  compaction, 
which affects 13 % of the national territory, particularly 
in  the  eastern  part  of  the  country.  6 %  of  the  land  is 
considered peatlands experiencing degradation, and 4 % 
of  the  national  territory  is  experiencing  unsustainable 
soil erosion by water, wind, tillage, and harvest. 

Grasslands 

Grasslands  are  among  the  most  diverse  ecosystems  in 
the EU; they can contain as many as 80 different  plant 
species per square metre and are home to a large variety 
of animals, ranging from small insects, birds and rodents 
to 
for 
large  herbivores.  Grasslands  are  essential 
agriculture and livestock herding. Natural grasslands also 
play  an  important  role  in  storing  carbon.  However, 
changes  in  agricultural  practices  and  land  uses  have 
caused  grasslands  to  disappear  at  an  alarming  rate, 
making  them  one  of  Europe’s  most  threatened 

(48) 

(49) 

Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the 
Council on soil monitoring and resilience (Soil Monitoring Law), 
COM(2023) 416 
https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52023PC0416. 
Commission  staff  working  document –  Impact  assessment 
report: Annexes – Accompanying the proposal for a directive of 
the European Parliament and of the Council on soil monitoring 

2023, 

5 July 

final 

of 

(see 

The  award-winning  pilot  programme 
‘Blooming 
meadows’ (50) (2023–2026) of the LIFE integrated project 
LatviaNature  supports  landowners  managing  perennial 
for  more 
grasslands 
information). The programme aims to boost biodiversity 
by  naturalising  grasslands,  helping  them  qualify  as 
protected grassland habitats of community importance, 
which  would  make  landowners  eligible  for  ongoing 
support. 

‘Recovery  of  species’ 

2025 priority action 
•  Promote active management of grasslands through 
extensive grazing to maintain the condition of these 
semi-natural habitats.  

Wetlands/peatlands 

Wetlands act as water sources and purifiers; they are the 
planet’s  greatest  natural  carbon  stores  and  they  are 
crucial  to  agriculture  and  fisheries.  Peatlands  are  a 
special  type  of  wetlands  dominated  by  peat-forming 
plants such as Sphagnum mosses. Nearly all peatlands in 
the EU are habitat types listed in Annex I to the Habitats 
Directive. Drained peatlands under intensive agricultural 
use  constitute  only  3 %  of  the  EU’s  utilised  agricultural 
area. At the same time, they are responsible for 25 % of 
the  GHG  emissions  from  the  EU’s  agricultural  sector. 
Restoring  peatlands  brings  multiple  benefits,  as 
peatlands  improve  water  retention  and  quality,  store 
carbon, reduce GHG emissions and increase biodiversity. 

In  Latvia,  eight  wetland/peatland  habitat  types  are 
protected  under  Annex I  to  the  Habitats  Directive. 
According 
in 
accordance  with  Article 17  of  the  Habitats  Directive, 
most  of  these  habitats  are  classified  as  having 

report (51)  produced 

latest 

the 

to 

and  resilience  (Soil  Monitoring  Law),  SWD(2023) 417  final  of 
5 July 
2023, 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-
07/IMPACT 
REPORT_ANNEXES_SWD_2023_417_part4.pdf. 
https://latvianature.daba.gov.lv/ziedu-plavas/. 
The report covers the 2013–2018 reporting period. 

ASSESSMENT 

(50) 
(51) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  19 

unfavourable conservation status, with the exception of 
calcareous  fens,  which  are  considered  in  favourable 
condition. The threats to peatlands are human-induced 
changes to water regimes, resource extraction, forestry, 
natural  processes,  agriculture,  development,  invasive 
species and climate change. 

Peatlands are unique and rare ecosystems that, despite 
only covering around 3-4% of the planet’s land surface, 
contain up to one-third of the world’s soil carbon, which 
is  twice  the  amount  of  carbon  as  found  in  the world’s 
(52).  Peatland  restoration  and  sustainable 
forests 
management is highly important to both combat climate 
change  and  preserve  biodiversity.  Living  peatlands  not 
only  sequester  carbon  dioxide  (CO2)  but  also  provide  a 
healthy habitat for valuable species and remove nitrates 
from polluted agricultural run-off through denitriﬁcation. 
Peatland loss also means biodiversity loss, more floods 
and  droughts,  degraded  drinking  water  for 
local 
communities  and  eutrophication  of  open  waters.  This 
last  impact  should  be  avoided,  especially  around  the 
Baltic Sea, which is affected by eutrophication at a level 
of 97 %. Damage is caused when peatlands are drained 
for agriculture and tree planting, with peat extracted for 
fuel or horticulture. 

Peatland restoration experts have raised concerns about 
the Latvian trend towards the afforestation of degraded 
peatlands  (53).  This  approach  violates  the  concept  of 
sustainability  by  sacrificing  the  most  space-effective 
carbon  store  of  the  terrestrial  biosphere –  peatlands – 
less  space-effective  and  more 
for  a  shorter-term, 
vulnerable  carbon  store –  namely, 
tree  biomass. 
Afforesting peatlands would not only bring limited or no 
climate mitigation benefits, but also go against the Do No 
Significant  Harm  (DNSH)  principle,  as  well  as  the 
Guidelines  on  Biodiversity-Friendly  Afforestation, 
Reforestation  and  Tree  Plantings54  and  the  peatland 
restoration  targets  under  the  Nature  Restoration 
Regulation. Thus, Latvia is required to evaluate the Just 
Transition Fund (JTF) projects in alignment with the DNSH 
principle. 

Drained  peatlands  make  up  6 %  of  Latvia’s  agricultural 
land (compared with the EU average of 3 %) but account 
for  71 %  of  the  country’s  agricultural  emissions, 
significantly  higher  than  the  EU  average  of  25 % (55). 

Latvia’s 

aligns  with 

re-wetting  and 
Restoring  peatlands,  notably  by 
renaturalisation 
long-term 
environmental  and  climate  goals  by  preserving  one  of 
the  most  efficient  carbon  stores  on  the  planet  and 
contributing  to  the  goals  of  the  Nature  Restoration 
Regulation,  as  well  as  land  use,  land-use  change  and 
forestry (LULUCF) targets. 

2025 priority action 
• 

Implement  peatland  conservation  and  restoration 
measures and include such measures and objectives 
in the national restoration plans.  

Forest ecosystems 

Forests are important carbon sinks, and conserving them 
is vital if the EU is to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. 
The EU forest strategy for 2030, adopted in July 2021, is 
a  plan  of  actions  to  promote  the  many  services  that 
forests  provide.  Its  key  objective  is  to  ensure  healthy, 
forests  that  contribute 
diverse  and  resilient  EU 
significantly to the achievement of the EU’s biodiversity 
and climate ambitions. About 27 % of the forest area in 
the EU is covered by habitat types listed in Annex I to the 
Habitats  Directive.  Moreover,  forests  host  several 
species  protected  under  the  Birds  and  Habitats 
Directives, 
is  a 
requirement  to  designate  Natura  2000  sites  and  to 
protect breeding sites and resting places. 

including  those  for  which  there 

Several  guidelines  on  forestry  management  were 
published  in  2023.  They  covered  biodiversity-friendly 
afforestation, reforestation and tree planting; closer-to-
nature  forest  management;  and  defining,  mapping, 
monitoring  and  strictly  protecting  primary  and  old-
growth  forests.  Further  guidance  on  payment  schemes 
for ecosystems services has also been published. 

In  2023,  the  Commission  proposed  a  new  forest 
monitoring law (56) that aims to create a comprehensive 
forest  knowledge  base,  address  information  gaps  and 
enable  a  better  response  to  growing  pressures  on 
forests. 

Assessments  show  that,  of  the  27 %  of  EU  forest  area 
protected under the Habitats Directive, less than 15 % is 
of  favourable  conservation  status (57).  The  share  of 

(52)  Global Peatlands Assessment: The State of the World’s Peatlands 

https://eu.boell.org/en/PeatlandAtlas. 

(53) 

| UNEP - UN Environment Programme. 
Active afforestation of drained peatlands is not a viable option 
under the EU Nature Restoration Law 

(54)   European Commission, 2023, Guidelines on Biodiversity-Friendly 
Afforestation,  Reforestation  and  Tree  Planting  -  European 
Commission 

(55)  Heinrich  Böll  Foundation,  German  Federation 

the 
Environment  and  Nature  Conservation,  Michael  Succow 
Foundation, et al., Peatland Atlas – Facts and figures about wet 
p. 35, 
climate 

guardians, 

2023, 

for 

(56)   Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  on  a  monitoring  framework  for  resilient  European 
forests, 
2023, 
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-
register/detail?ref=COM(2023)728&lang=en 

COM(2023)728, 

November 

22 

(57) 

EEA, State of Nature in the EU: Results from reporting under the 
Nature  Directives  2013–2018,  Publications  Office  of  the 
2020, 
European 

Luxembourg, 

Union, 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
forested areas in the EU with a bad conservation status 
increased from 27 % in 2015 to 31 % in 2018. 

of  the  large  area  of  forest  for  which  the  company  is 
responsible. 

Latvia  20 

Meanwhile, in Latvia, according to the report produced 
for  the  most  recent  reporting  period  (2013–2018),  all 
forests  protected  under  the  Habitats  Directive  have  a 
poor or bad status, or their status is unknown (Figure 13). 

In  Latvia,  forests  covered  54.9  %  of  the  territory  in 
2020 (58). Primary forests covered 4 800 ha (59). 

The  Ministry  of  Smart  Administration  and  Regional 
Development (VARAM) report adopted by the Cabinet in 
January 2025  indicates that between 2020 and 2023,  a 
total  of  9,100.8  hectares  of  forest  habitats  were 
destroyed.  These  habitats,  identified  through  detailed 
habitat  mapping  and  recorded  in  the  “Ozols”  nature 
database,  were  primarily 
lost  due  to  clear-cutting 
practices,  including  significant  losses  in  state-owned 
forests (60).  

infringement  case  against  Latvia (61), 

In  an 
the 
Commission  identified  a  number  of  gaps  in  Latvia’s 
Natura  2000  network  in  relation  to  multiple  forest 
habitat  types  listed  in  the  Habitats  Directive  (including 
9080*,  9050  and  91T0).  According  to  latest  update 
received  from  Latvia,  for  habitat  types  9050  and  91T0, 
sufficient  number  of  sites  have  been  included  in  the 
Natura  2000  network.  The  Commission  is  currently 
assessing the progress made by Latvia in completing the 
Natura  2000  network  in  relation  to  those  two  habitat 
types.  However,  the  Latvian  authorities  have  indicated 
their  intention  to  designate  further  sites  for  priority 
habitat type 9080* and have preliminarily identified 74 
sites for designation but have yet to finalise this work. To 
ensure  the  sufficiency  of  the  network  and  the  proper 
coverage  of  these  vital  habitat  types  in  Latvia,  the 
Commission  urges  the  authorities  to  finalise  these 
designations and to identify further sites where required. 
Such  designations  will  only  be  effective  if  the  sites  are 
properly  managed  in  accordance  with  the  ecological 
requirements of the habitat types. 

In  particular,  it  must  be  ensured  that  the  state-owned 
forestry  company  Latvia’s  State  Forests  also  fully 
complies with the requirements of the Habitats Directive 
and the Birds Directive. This is especially crucial in view 

Figure 13:  Conservation  status  of  forests  protected 
under  the  Habitats  Directive  per  Member  State  (%  of 
assessments), 2013–2018 

Source: Commission staff working document – New EU forest strategy 
for  2030,  SWD(2021) 652 
final  of  16 July  2021,  p. 24,  eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021SC0652. 

. 

to 

in  protected  areas, 

improve  compensation 

According  to  a  recent  Cabinet  of  Ministers  report 
(2024) (62),  the  recently  reorganised  VARAM  (now  the 
Ministry  of  Smart  Administration  and  Regional 
Development), in coordination with other ministries, will 
legal  amendments  and  mechanisms  by 
propose 
September  2025 
for 
landowners 
thus  promoting 
landowner  involvement  in  preserving  biodiversity  and 
achieving climate goals. Measures will include land buy-
backs,  land-use  change,  compensation  for  the  value  of 
the forest stand in the form of a lump sum payment, and 
a  support  programme  for  landowners.  These  initiatives 
aim  to  balance  conservation  efforts  with  landowners’ 
rights  by  establishing  updated  compensation  rates  and 
methods.  Additionally,  the  feasibility  of  a  biodiversity 
credit market will be explored. 

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state-of-nature-in-
the-eu-2020. 

(58)   EEA,  forest  information  system  for  Europe,  ‘Countries –  FISE 
country  factsheets’,  forest  information  system  for  Europe 
website, https://forest.eea.europa.eu/countries. 

(59)   Barredo,  J.,  Brailescu,  C.,  Teller,  A.  et  al.  ,  Mapping  and 
assessment  of  primary  and  old-growth  forests  in  Europe, 
Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2021, 
p. 13, 
https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC124
671. 

(60) 

(61) 

(62) 

VARAM, On results of identification of distribution and quality of 
protected habitats and further action to find a balance between 
ensuring  a  favourable  protection  status  of  protected  habitats 
and economic interests, 24-TA-250, 2024.  

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_19
_6304. 
Cabinet  of  Ministers,  Information  report  on  proposals  for 
providing compensation  for restrictions on economic  activity  in 
protected  areas  and  possible  financial  sources  for  covering 
compensation, 
2024, 
https://tapportals.mk.gov.lv/structuralizer/data/nodes/b6e9bb
11-3a70-49ad-96d0-ec3ddcb1dcc3/preview. 

24-TA-2287, 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
The  EU  Timber  Regulation  (EUTR) (63)  prohibits  the 
placing on the EU market of illegally harvested timber.  

into 

(EUDR) (64)  entered 

On  29 June  2023,  the  Regulation  on  Deforestation-free 
(65).  The 
Products 
regulation  seeks  to  guarantee  that  products  in  the  EU 
that  are  made  using  any  of  seven  listed  commodities 
have  no  links  to  deforestation.  The  Regulation  on 
deforestation-free  products  repeals  the  EU  Timber 
Regulation. 

force 

2025 priority action 

• 

Improve conservation status of forests by promoting 
sustainable 
forest  management  and  ensuring 
compliance  with  the  Habitats  Directive  before 
granting/renewing permits for forest logging.  

Marine ecosystems 

The  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  (MSFD) 
requires Member States to achieve good environmental 
status  (GES)  for  their  marine  waters.  To  that  end, 
Member States must draw up marine strategies for their 
marine waters and cooperate with other Member States 
sharing  the  same  marine  region  or  subregion.  These 
marine  strategies  comprise  different  steps  to  be 
developed and implemented over six-year cycles. 

Since  the  2022  Environmental  Implementation  Review 
(EIR)  report,  no  additional  data  regarding  Member 
States’  set  of  GES  characteristics  for  each  descriptor  in 
the MSFD have become available. Nevertheless, Member 
States have to report updates by 15 October 2024, and 
these will be assessed by the Commission. In the context 
of this next round of reporting, in accordance with the 
MSFD  and  the  Commission  GES  decision (66),  Member 
States  must 
include  as  part  of  their  set  of  GES 
characteristics any threshold values for the descriptors in 
the MSFD that may have been established in cooperation 
with other Member States at the EU or regional level (67). 

The  Commission  assessed  the  updated  monitoring 
programme reported by Member States in 2020 (68). At 

Latvia  21 

that time, their updates on the elements, features and 
parameters identified monitoring gaps. The Commission 
recommended  that  Member  States  should  prioritise 
levels  of 
work 
implementation of the MSFD. 

those  gaps  at  all 

to  address 

Member States also reported their updated programmes 
of measures, which are required under Article 13 of the 
MSFD and  which  must  be updated every  six years. The 
Commission has assessed Member States’ programmes 
of measures. 

Figure 14:  Level  of  adequacy  of  Latvia’s  updated 
programme of measures under  Article 13 of the MSFD 
(2022 reporting exercise) 

Source: Technical assessment carried out by the European Commission, 
pursuant  to  Article 16  of  the  MSFD,  based  on  the  data  reported  by 
Latvia in September and October 2023. 

Latvia’s  updated  programme  of  measures  shows 
contrasting 
levels  of  adequacy  across  different 
descriptors,  scoring  ‘very  good’  for  D2  (non-indigenous 
species)  but  ‘very  poor’  for  D4  (food  webs)  and  D11 
(energy, including underwater noise). 

For non-indigenous species (D2), Latvia introduced new 
measures  aiming  to  prevent  NIS  introduction  through 

(63) 

(64) 

Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of 
the  Council  of  20 October  2010  laying  down the  obligations  of 
operators who place timber and timber products on the market 
(OJ  L 295,  12.11.2010,  p. 23),  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32010R0995. 
Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of 
the Council of 31 May 2023 on the making available on the Union 
market and the export  from the Union of certain commodities 
and  products  associated  with  deforestation  and 
forest 
degradation  and  repealing  Regulation  (EU)  No 995/2010  (OJ 
L 150,  9.6.2023,  p. 206),  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1115&qid=1687867231
461. 

(65)   The law will apply to large and medium-sized companies starting 
on  December  30,  2025,  and  to  micro  and  small  enterprises 

(66) 

(67) 

(68) 

starting on June 30, 2026. 
Commission  Decision  (EU) 2017/848  of  17 May  2017  laying 
down  criteria  and  methodological  standards  on  good 
environmental  status  of  marine  waters  and  specifications  and 
standardised  methods  for  monitoring  and  assessment,  and 
repealing  Decision 2010/477/EU  (OJ  L 125,  18.5.2017,  p. 43), 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2017/848/oj. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  of  11 March  2024 – 
Commission notice on the threshold values set under the Marine 
Strategy  Framework  Directive  (Directive  2008/56/EC)  and 
Commission  Decision  (EU)  2017/848  (OJ  C,  C/2024/2078, 
11.3.2024), http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2078/oj. 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-
04/C_2023_2203_F1_COMMUNICATION_FROM_COMMISSION
_EN_V5_P1_2532109.PDF. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
shipping, based on the work of the International Ballast 
Water  Convention,  as  well  as 
implementing  early 
warning systems and expanding the scope of measures 
to  cover  marine  areas  beyond  coastal  areas.  Pressures 
were sufficiently quantified and the expected impact of 
these measures properly assessed. 

For  D3 (commercial  fish and shellfish), D4 (food webs), 
D7  (hydrographical  changes),  D10  (litter)  and  D11 
(energy, including underwater noise), however, no new 
measures  were  reported,  leaving  pressures  for  these 
descriptors inadequately addressed. 

In  2022,  Latvia  received  a  priority  action  to  ensure 
regional  cooperation  with  Member  States  sharing  the 
same  marine  (sub)regions  to  address  predominant 
pressures.  
Latvia  worked  closely  with  other  Baltic  Sea  countries 
through  regional  organizations  such  as  the  Helsinki 
Commission 
In  October  2023,  Latvia 
organised the 14th Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for 
the  Baltic  Sea  Region  (EUSBSR),  titled 
‘Safe  and 
Sustainable Baltic Sea Region for Future Generations‘.  

(HELCOM). 

2025 priority action 

its 

•  Report  updates  on  the  assessment  of  the  state  of 
Latvia’s  marine  waters, 
its 
determinations  of  GES (69),  which  are  expected  to 
include  any  threshold  values  for  the  descriptors  in 
the  MSFD  that  may  have  been  established  in 
cooperation with other Member States at the EU or 
regional level. 

target  and 

Prevention and management of invasive alien 
species 

Invasive  alien  species  (IAS)  are  a  major  cause  of 
biodiversity  loss  in  the  EU.  Besides  inflicting  direct  and 
indirect damage on nature and the economy, some IAS 
also carry and spread infectious diseases, posing a threat 
to  humans  and  wildlife.  Regulation  (EU)  No 1143/2014 
(the  IAS  Regulation)  aims  to  prevent,  minimise  and 

(69) 
(70) 

(71) 

(72) 

In accordance with Article 17 of Directive 2008/56/EC. 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1141 of 13 July 
2016 adopting a list of  invasive alien species of Union concern 
pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU)  No 1143/2014  of  the  European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council  (OJ  L 189,  14.7.2016,  p. 4),  as 
amended  by  Commission 
Implementing  Regulations  (EU) 
2017/1263,  (EU)  2019/1262  and  (EU)  2022/1203,  https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R1141-
20220802&from=EN. 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1203 of 12 July 
2022  amending  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1141  to 
update  the  list  of  invasive  alien  species  of  Union  concern  (OJ 
L 186,  13.7.2022,  p. 10),  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1203. 
Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and 

Latvia  22 

mitigate  the  adverse  impacts  of  IAS  on  biodiversity.  It 
focuses action on a list of IAS of EU concern (the ‘Union 
list’), which is regularly updated (70). 

The third update of the Union list (71) entered into force 
on 2 August 2022. The fourth update is in preparation. 

The IAS Regulation (72) currently lists 88 species subject 
to  restrictions  on  keeping,  importing,  selling,  breeding, 
growing  and  releasing  into  the  environment.  Member 
States are required to take measures to (i) prevent the 
introduction of IAS, (ii) ensure early detection and rapid 
eradication  of  IAS  and  (iii)  manage  species  that  are 
already widespread on their territory. 

This  aligns  with  target 6  of  the  GBF  to  reduce  the 
introduction of IAS by at least 50 % by 2030 and minimise 
their impact. 

Preventing  the  introduction  and  spread  of  IAS,  and 
managing  them, 
including  through  eradication  and 
control,  can  result  in  a  substantial  cost  saving.  Studies 
estimate  that  the  total  cost  of  IAS  in  Europe  (damages 
and  management)  amounted  to  EUR 116.61 billion 
between  1960  and  2020 (73).  More  recent  studies  have 
put  this  cost  at  USD 28 billion  per  year  in  the  EU, 
increasing  to  USD 148.2 billion  by  2040 (74),  and  at 
USD 423 billion annually at the global level (75). 

The  spread  of  IAS  is  a  significant  problem  throughout 
integrated  project 
the  LIFE 
Latvia.  As  part  of 
LatviaNature (76),  Latvia  is  conducting  a  large  scientific 
study  (2023–2026)  on  controlling  IAS,  targeting  five 
harmful species across 13 pilot areas, totalling more than 
110 ha.  The  species  being  studied  include  Canadian 
goldenrod, Himalayan balsam, rugosa rose, spiked cornel 
and  ash-leaved  maple.  Researchers  are  testing  various 
control methods for each species, with plans informed by 
scientific  publications  and  the  experiences  of  Latvia’s 
Nature  Conservation  Agency  and  international  sources. 
The results will be used to develop national guidelines for 
managing IAS throughout Latvia by 2027. 

The total number of IAS of Union concern in the country 

of  the  Council  of  22 October  2014  on  the  prevention  and 
management  of  the  introduction  and  spread  of  invasive  alien 
species (OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35). 

(73)  Haubrock, P. J., Turbelin, A. J., Cuthbert, R. N. et al., ‘Economic 
costs of invasive alien species across Europe’, NeoBiota, Vol. 63, 
2021, pp. 153–190. 

(75) 

(Intergovernmental 

(74)  Henry, M., Leung, B., Cuthbert, R. N. et al., ‘Unveiling the hidden 
economic  toll  of  biological  invasions  in  the  European  Union’, 
Environmental Sciences Europe, Vol. 35, No 1, 2023, p. 43. 
on 
Platform 
IPBES 
Biodiversity 
for 
Summary 
Policymakers –  Invasive  alien  species  assessment,  Bonn,  2023, 
https://www.ipbes.net/document-library-catalogue/summary-
policymakers-invasive-alien-species-assessment. 
https://latvianature.daba.gov.lv/invazivo-sugu-ierobezosanas-
teritorijas/. 

Science-Policy 
Services), 

Ecosystem 

and 

(76) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
is 17. This includes 14 species recorded in the previous 
EIR (2021) and 3 additions. Of these additions, two were 
already on the Union concern list in 2021, and one was 
added later under Commission Implementing Regulation 
(EU) 2022/1203. 

Figure 15: Number of IAS of EU concern in Latvia 

In 2022, Latvia got a priority action to take the necessary 
steps  to  ensure  full  compliance  with  the  requirements 
specified in Article 13 of the IAS Regulation. The priority 
action 
is  fulfilled  as  Latvia  has  taken  appropriate 
measures to comply with Article 13 of the IAS Regulation. 

2025 priority action 

• 

Step up enforcement and the capacity of inspection 
authorities on IAS. 

Ecosystem assessment and accounting 

The  BDS  calls  on  Member  States  to  better  integrate 
biodiversity  considerations  into  public  and  business 
decision-making  at  all  levels  and  to  develop  natural 
capital accounting. 

Similarly, target 14 of the GBF (77) aims to ensure the full 
integration  of  biodiversity  and  its  multiple  values  into 

Latvia  23 

policy  and  planning  and,  as  appropriate,  national 
accounting.  This  requires  effective  and  coherent 
biodiversity  observation  and  reporting  on  ecosystem 
condition in the EU (78). 

The amended Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 on European 
environmental  economic  accounts (79)  introduces  new 
requirements  for  Member  States  to  report  on  the 
condition  of  ecosystems  including  urban  ecosystems, 
croplands,  grasslands,  forest  and  woodlands,  coastal 
beaches,  dunes  and  wetlands.  Data  reported  by  the 
Member  States  will  feed  into  the  second  European 
ecosystem assessment, due in 2027, and can also be used 
to support policy decisions. 

An ecosystem assessment is an analysis of the condition 
of ecosystems and the pressures acting on them, as well 
as  the  benefits  that  they  provide  to  people,  either 
directly or indirectly through the economy. 

An 
increasing  number  of  platforms,  networks  and 
communities of practice involve businesses in protecting 
biodiversity,  including  the  EU  Business  &  Biodiversity 
Platform (80). These platforms and communities are key 
tools  for  promoting  and  facilitating  natural  capital 
assessments  among  businesses  and  financial  services 
providers. 

Natural  capital  assessments  help  private  businesses  to 
better  understand  both  the  negative  and  positive 
impacts that they have on nature, and to appreciate how 
nature contributes to their success. Such understanding 
contributes to the implementation of the EU’s BDS. 

Latvia has not signed and ratified the Nagoya Protocol on 
Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable 
Sharing  of  Benefits  Arising  from  their  Utilization  to  the 
Convention on Biological Diversity. 

In 2022, Latvia  received a priority action on supporting 
the  mapping  and  assessment  of  ecosystems  and  their 
services,  and  ecosystem  accounting  development,  as 
well  as  on  supporting  the  development  of  national 
business and biodiversity platforms. The first part of the 
priority action cannot be assessed due to the lack of data. 
There is no progress on the second part: there is still no 

(77)  Decision 15/4 adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the 
Convention  on  Biological  Diversity:  Kunming–Montreal  global 
framework 
biodiversity 
(https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-04-
en.pdf). 
European  Commission:  Joint  Research  Centre  and  EEA,  EU 
Ecosystem 
policymakers, 
Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2021, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/81ff1498-b91d-11eb-8aca-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

Assessment – 

Summary 

(78) 

for 

(79) 

(80) 

final 

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  amending  Regulation  (EU)  No 691/2011  as  regards 
introducing  new  environmental  economic  accounts  modules, 
COM(2022) 329 
https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2022:329:FIN. 
The  EU  Business  &  Biodiversity  Platform  (https://green-
business.ec.europa.eu/business-and-biodiversity_en)  aims  to 
promote  the  business  case  for  biodiversity  to  businesses  and 
financial institutions through workshops, seminars, reports and 
a cross-media communication strategy. 

11 July 

2022, 

of 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Latvian business and biodiversity network member of the 
EU Business & Biodiversity Platform. 

• 

2025 priority action 

• 

Support  the  development  of  the  national  business 
and biodiversity network. 

ratify  the  Nagoya  Protocol  on  Access  to  Genetic 
Resources  and  the  Fair  and  Equitable  Sharing  of 
Benefits  Arising  from  their  Utilization  (ABS)  to  the 
Convention on Biological Diversity.

Latvia  24 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Latvia  25 

Clean air

3. Zero pollution 

EU  clean  air  policies  and  legislation  have  successfully 
reduced  emissions  of  key  air  pollutants  and  significantly 
improved  air  quality,  which  is  now  moving  towards  the 
levels  recommended  by  the  World  Health  Organization 
(WHO).  This  has  resulted  in  clear  health  benefits  and 
reduced adverse impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity. 
However, to achieve the WHO-recommended levels, more 
efforts  are  needed,  including  full  compliance  with  EU 
legislation.  To  guide  these  efforts,  the  EU  zero  pollution 
action plan sets targets for 2030 relative to 2005. These 
are to reduce the health impacts of air pollution by 55 % 
and  to  reduce  the  EU  ecosystems  threatened  by  air 
pollution by 25 %. 

dioxide  (SO2)  and  PM2.5,  and  has  not  met  them  for 
ammonia  (NH3).  According  to  the  projections  submitted 
under Article 10(2) of the NECD in 2023, Latvia is projected 
to  meet  its  emission  reduction  commitments  for  2030 
onwards for NOx, NMVOC, SO2, NH3 and PM2.5. 

Latvia  submitted  its  first  national  air  pollution  control 
programme (NAPCP) to the Commission on 16 April 2020. 
An  update  was  due  four  years  afterwards.  Latvia  also 
needs  to  update  its  policies  and  measures  to  reduce  air 
emissions. 

Figure 16: Emission trends of main pollutants / GDP in 
Latvia (%), 2005–2022 

The EU has developed a comprehensive suite of air quality 
policies (81).  These  set  health-based  EU  air  quality 
standards (82)  and  stipulate  Member  States’  national 
emission  reduction  commitments (83)  for  several  air 
pollutants. 

The  air  quality  in  Latvia  is  generally  good,  with  some 
exceptions. 

The  latest  available  annual  estimates  (for  2022)  by  the 
EEA (84)  for  Latvia  attribute  820  deaths  each  year  (or 
8 400 years  of  life  lost  (YLL))  to  fine  particulate  matter 
(PM2.5) (85),  120  deaths  each  year  (or  1 300 YLL)  to 
nitrogen dioxide  (NO2) (86) and  220 deaths each year  (or 
2 300 YLL) to ozone (87). 

The  emissions  of  several  air  pollutants  have  decreased 
significantly  in  Latvia  since  2005,  while  GDP  growth  has 
continued  (see  Figure 16).  According  to  the  inventories 
submitted  under  Article 10(2)  of  the  National  Emission 
Reduction  Commitments  Directive  (NECD) (88)  in  2024, 
Latvia  has  met  its  emission  reduction  commitments  for 
2020–2029 for air pollutants  nitrogen oxides (NOx), non-
methane  volatile  organic  compounds  (NMVOC),  sulphur 

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

NH₃

PM2.5
PM2.5

NMVOC

SO₂

NOₓ

GDP

Source: EEA, ‘National air pollutant emissions data viewer 2005–2022’, 
25 June 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/air-
pollution/national-air-pollutant-emissions-data-viewer-2005-2022. 

2024, 

(81) 

(82) 

(83) 

(84) 

(85) 

European  Commission,  ‘Air’,  European  Commission  website, 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air_en. 
European  Commission,  ‘EU  air  quality  standards’,  European 
Commission 
website, 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air/air-quality/eu-air-
quality-standards_en. 
European  Commission,  ‘Reducing  emissions  of  air  pollutants’, 
European 
website, 
Commission 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air/reducing-
emissions-air-pollutants_en. 
EEA, Harm to human health from air pollution in Europe: Burden 
of  disease  2024,  briefing  No 21/2024,  Copenhagen,  2024, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/harm-to-
human-health-from-air-pollution-2024. 
Particulate matter (PM) is a mixture of aerosol particles (solid and 
liquid) covering a wide range of sizes and chemical compositions. 
PM10  refers  to  particles  with  a  diameter  of  10 µm  or  less.  PM2.5 

refers to particles with a diameter of 2.5 µm or less. PM is emitted 
from many human sources, including combustion. 

(86)  Nitrogen  dioxide  (NO2)  here  pertains  to  a  group  of  gases  called 
NOx, which also comprises nitrogen monoxide (NO). NOx is emitted 
during fuel combustion – for example, from industrial facilities and 
the road transport sector. 
Low-level  ozone 
is  produced  by  photochemical  action  on 
pollution.  This  year,  for  the  first  time,  the  impact  of  long-term 
exposure to ozone has also been taken into account. In previous 
analysis by the EEA, only the impact of short-term exposure was 
estimated. 

(87) 

(88)  Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  14 December  2016  on  the  reduction  of  national 
emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 
2003/35/EC  and  repealing  Directive  2001/81/EC  (OJ  L 344, 
17.12.2016, 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2016.344.01.0001.01.ENG. 

p. 1), 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Figure 17:  PM2.5  and  NOx  emissions  by  sector  in  Latvia 
(%), 2022 

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Waste

Transport

Residential,
commercial &
institutional

Manufacturing
and extractive
industry

Energy supply

Agriculture

PM2.5
PM2.5
1,67%

4,73%

NOₓ

0,01%

51,19%

62,07%

7,68%

11,80%

17,69%

18,11%

1,62%

9,49%

13,94%

Source: EEA, ‘National air pollutant emissions data viewer 2005–2022’, 
25 June 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/air-
pollution/national-air-pollutant-emissions-data-viewer-2005-2022. 

2024, 

In  2023,  no  exceedances  above  the 
limit  values 
established  by  the  Ambient  Air  Quality  Directive 
(AAQD) (89) were registered in Latvia. However, the target 
value for benzo(a)pyrene concentration has not been met 
in one air quality zone (90). 

Infringement procedures have been opened for Member 
States not meeting the emission reduction commitments 
for  2020–2029;  this  includes  a  procedure  for  Latvia  for 
NH3. 

In the 2022 EIR, Latvia received three priority actions. The 
first priority action was to further reduce emissions in the 
context  of  the  NAPCP.  Latvia  has  not  made  progress  on 
this,  as  the  latest  reported  data  show  continued  non-

(89)  Directive  2008/50/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for 
Europe 
https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32008L0050. 
Eionet 
EEA, 
(https://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/). 

Repository 

11.6.2008, 

Central 

L 152, 

p. 1), 

Data 

(90) 

(OJ 

(91)  Directive  2010/75/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial and livestock rearing 

Latvia  26 

compliance  with  the  2020–2029  emission  reduction 
commitment  for  NH3.  The  second  priority  action  was  to 
ensure full compliance with EU air quality standards and 
maintain downward emission trends. Based on the latest 
data,  Latvia  has  made  some  progress  in  this  regard. 
However, exceedances above the target values remain for 
benzo(a)pyrene.  Since  2019,  downward  emission  trends 
have been reported for all main pollutants except for SO2. 
This  situation  requires  further  action.  The  third  priority 
action received by Latvia was to ratify the Heavy Metals 
Protocol  and  the  Persistent  Organic  Pollutants  Protocol, 
which has been fulfilled. 

2025 priority actions 

•  As part of the NAPCP, take action to reduce emissions 

• 

of air pollutants. 
Ensure  full  compliance  with  the  current  AAQD 
standards, also in light of future stricter requirements 
under the revised AAQD. 

Industrial emissions 

The  main objectives of EU policy on industrial emissions 
are to: 

(i)  protect  air,  water  and  soil  and  to  prevent  harmful 
effects on human health and the environment; 

(ii)  prevent and manage waste; 
(iii)  improve  energy  and  resource  efficiency,  including 

water; 

(iv)  contribute to decarbonisation. 

The  cornerstone  of  the  policy  is the  Industrial  Emissions 
Directive (IED), which was revised in 2024 (91). The revision 
improves the directive’s contribution to the zero pollution 
objective. It has a strong focus on innovation, and builds 
solid  links  between  depollution,  decarbonisation  and 
circularity, making it a key regulatory tool to accompany 
the green transformation of EU industry by 2050. 

The overview of industrial activities regulated by the IED 
below  is  based  on  data  reported  to  the  EU  Registry  in 
2022 (92). 

In  Latvia,  there  were  about  100  installations  covered  by 
the  IED  in  2022,  around  one  third  of  them  (33 %)  being 
installations  for  the  intensive  rearing  of  poultry  or  pigs. 
The other main sectors are the waste management sector 

emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (OJ L 334, 
17.12.2010, p. 17), as amended by Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  24 April  2024, 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02010L0075-
20240804&qid=1725983863299. 
EEA, 
Portal, 
Industrial 
European 
https://industry.eea.europa.eu/, 2022 being the baseline year for 
all reports. 

Emissions 

(92) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
(30 %),  the  energy  sector  (14 %)  and  the  metals  sector 
(6 %). 

Figure 19: Industrial releases of pollutants to water and 
industrial activity in the EU-27 

Latvia  27 

Figure 18  shows  the  damage  to  health  and 
the 
environment due to the main industrial air pollutants. As 
this  depends  on,  among  other  factors,  the  size  of  the 
industrial  sector  in  each  Member  State,  the  figure  also 
shows  the  ratio  between  the  damage  and  the  industrial 
activity  (expressed  in  gross  value  added  (GVA)),  which 
gives an indication of the emissions ‘intensity’. Latvia has 
the second lowest damage in the EU and has one of the 
lowest  emissions  intensities  (EUR 9.6/EUR 1 000  GVA), 
well  below  the  EU  average  of  EUR 27.5/EUR 1 000  GVA. 
The main industrial contributor to emissions to air  (93) is 
the  energy  sector  for  NOx,  SO2,  dust  and  emissions  of 
heavy metals. 

Figure 18:  Industrial  air  pollution  damage  and  intensity 
per Member State, 2021 

Source: EEA, ‘Industrial pollution intensity indicators – EU large industry 
air  pollution  damage  costs  intensity’,  European  Industrial  Emissions 
Portal, 
https://industry.eea.europa.eu/analyse/industrial-
emissions-indicator. 

2024, 

Overall, the industrial emissions to water in the EU have 
decreased  over  time  for  all  the  main  pollutants.  On 
average in the EU, they appear to be decoupled from the 
industrial  activity,  which  has  increased  over  the  same 
period (expressed in GVA), as shown in Figure 19. 

NB:  Cd,  cadmium;  Hg, mercury;  Ni,  nickel;  Pb,  lead;  TOC,  total  organic 
carbon; total N, total nitrogen; total P, total phosphorous. 

Source:  EEA,  ‘Industrial  pollutant  releases to  water  in Europe’,  30 May 
2024, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/industrial-
pollutant-releases-to-water. 

Concerning  Latvia  in  particular,  Figure 21  shows  the 
industrial emissions of heavy metals to water, taking into 
account the human toxicity of each metal, as well as  the 
emissions  intensity,  based  on  its  ratio  with  industrial 
activity (expressed in GVA). Latvia has one of the lowest 
emissions of heavy metals to water (weighted by human 
toxicity factors) and emissions intensities (well below the 
EU  average  of  0.864 kg/EUR 1 billion  GVA).  As  shown  in 
Figure 21, the main industrial contributor to emissions to 
water in Latvia is the chemical sector for heavy metals. 

Figure 20:  Industrial  releases  and  intensity  of  heavy 
metals to water per Member State, 2022 

Source: EEA, ‘Industrial pollution intensity indicators – EU large industry 
water  pollution  intensity’,  European  Industrial  Emissions  Portal,  2024, 
https://industry.eea.europa.eu/analyse/industrial-emissions-indicator. 

(93) 

European  Environment  Agency,  LRTAP,  Air  pollutant  emissions 
data viewer (Gothenburg Protocol, LRTAP Convention) 1990-2022, 

https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/air-
pollution/air-pollutant-emissions-data-viewer-1990-2022. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 21:  Relative  releases  to  water  from  industry  in 
Latvia (%), 2022 

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%

Latvia  28 

2025 priority actions 

•  Reduce industrial air pollution damage and intensity. 
• 
Engage  with  industry  and  environmental  NGOs  to 
ensure proper contribution to and implementation of 
BAT conclusions and ensure timely updates to permits 
following the publication of BAT conclusions. 
Ensure  effective  public  participation  and  access  to 
justice in relation to the IED. 

• 

Heavy Metals Ecotoxicity

Heavy Metals Human Toxicity

Chemicals

Major industrial accidents prevention – Seveso 

The  main  objectives  of  EU  policy  on  the  prevention  of 
major industrial accidents are to: 

(i)  control  major-accident  hazards  involving  dangerous 

(ii) 

substances, especially chemicals; 
limit the consequences of such accidents for human 
health and the environment; 

(iii)  continuously 

improve 

the 

prevention 

of, 

preparedness for and response to major accidents. 

The cornerstone of the policy is Directive 2012/18/EU (the 
Seveso III Directive) (94). 

The overview below of industrial plants regulated by the 
Seveso III Directive (‘Seveso establishments’) is based on 
data  reported  on  eSPIRS  (e-Seveso  Plants  Information 
Retrieval  System)  for  2022–2024 (95)  and  the  report  by 
Latvia  on  the  implementation  of  the  Seveso III  Directive 
for 2019–2022 (96). 

In 2024, of the 64 Seveso establishments in Latvia, 36 were 
categorised as lower-tier establishments and 28 as upper-
tier  establishments  (UTEs),  based  on  the  quantity  of 
hazardous  substances  likely  to  be  present.  UTEs  are 
subject to more stringent requirements. The change in the 
in 
number  of  Seveso  establishments 
Figure 22. 

is  presented 

Source: EEA, ‘Industrial reporting under the Industrial Emissions Directive 
2010/75/EU  and  European  Pollutant  Release  and  Transfer  Register 
Regulation (EC) No 166/2006 – ver. 12.0 Sep. 2024 (tabular data)’, EEA 
Geospatial 
2024, 
Catalogue, 
https://doi.org/10.2909/cf5e54c1-be99-4426-bcad-baa26c4f27a0. 

13 September 

Data 

IED  provisions  on  public  information  and  participation 
require Member States to adopt transposition legislation 
enabling members of the public to have access to relevant 
information  and  participate  in  the  approval  process  for 
potentially  polluting  installations.  Thus,  the  public  and 
non-governmental  organisations 
(NGOs),  alongside 
competent authorities, play a role in ensuring compliance 
of  these  permits  with  EU  legislation.  The  IED  contains 
mandatory  requirements  on  environmental  inspections, 
requiring a site visit to take place at least every 1–3 years, 
using  risk-based  criteria.  In  addition,  IED  enforcement 
provisions require Member States to determine effective, 
proportionate,  and  dissuasive  penalties  applicable  to 
infringements  of  IED-based  national  provisions.  In  the 
revised  directive, 
that  worst 
the  provisions 
infringements can be sanctioned by fines of at least 3% of 
the  annual  EU  turnover  of  the  legal  person.  The  revised 
IED  also  introduces  a  right  to  compensation  for  people 
whose health has been harmed by such infringements. 

set 

The development of best available techniques (BATs), BAT 
reference  documents  and  BAT  conclusions  ensures 
effective collaboration between stakeholders and enables 
better implementation of the IED. 

Since  the  2022  EIR,  the  Commission  has  adopted  BAT 
conclusions on (i) ferrous metal processing, (ii) the textiles 
industry,  (iii)  common  waste  gas  management  and 
treatment  systems 
in  the  chemical  sector  and  (iv) 
smitheries and foundries. 

The  Commission  relies  on  the  efforts  of  national 
competent  authorities  to  implement  the  legally  binding 
BAT  conclusions  and  associated  BAT  emission  levels  in 
environmental permits. This should result in considerable 
and continuous reductions in pollution. 

(94)  Directive  2012/18/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  4 July  2012  on  the  control  of  major-accident  hazards 
involving  dangerous  substances,  amending  and  subsequently 
repealing  Council  Directive  96/82/EC  (OJ  L 197,  24.7.2012,  p. 1), 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2012/18/oj. 
https://espirs.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/espirs/content; data extracted 
in September 2024. 
As provided for by Article 21(2) of the Seveso III Directive. 

(95) 

(96) 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
  
 
Latvia  29 

Figure 22:  Number  of  Seveso  establishments  in  Latvia, 
2018, 2022 and 2024 

NB: LTE, lower-tier establishment. 

2022, 

Sources:  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Assessment and summary of Member States’ implementation reports for 
(implementing  Directive 
Implementing  Decision 
2014/896/EU 
2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major  accident  hazards 
involving 
dangerous  substances),  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union, 
Luxembourg, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/94d57d74-735b-11ec-9136-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF/source-search;  eSPIRS  data,  extractions  from  2022  and 
2024;  Analysis  and  summary  of  Member  States'  reports  on 
implementation  of  Directive  2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major 
accident hazards involving dangerous substances according to the format 
established  by  Commission  Implementing  Decision  2014/896/EU  - 
Publications  Office  of  the  EU,  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-
detail/-/publication/9bd73087-e9b8-11ef-b5e9-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

Member  States  are  required  to  draw  up  external 
emergency plans (EEPs). These EEPs are essential to allow 
proper  preparation  and  effective  implementation  of  the 
necessary  actions  to  protect  the  environment  and  the 
population should a major industrial accident occur. 

According to Latvia, in 2022, an EEP was required for all 28 
UTEs, and 26 of them had an EEP. All EEPs had been tested 
over  the  last  three  years.  The  summary  is  shown  in 
Figure 23. 

Figure 23: Situation regarding EEPs in Latvia, 2022 

Sources:  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Assessment and summary of Member States’ implementation reports for 
(implementing  Directive 
2014/896/EU 
Implementing  Decision 
2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major  accident  hazards 
involving 
dangerous  substances),  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union, 

2022, 

https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-

Luxembourg, 
/publication/94d57d74-735b-11ec-9136-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF/source-search;  eSPIRS  data,  extractions  from  2022  and 
2024;  Analysis  and  summary  of  Member  States'  reports  on 
implementation  of  Directive  2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major 
accident hazards involving dangerous substances according to the format 
established  by  Commission  Implementing  Decision  2014/896/EU  - 
Publications  Office  of  the  EU,  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-
detail/-/publication/9bd73087-e9b8-11ef-b5e9-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

The  following  types  of  information  are  permanently 
available  for  all  Seveso  establishments  in  Latvia:  (i) 
information  for  the  public  referred  to  in  Annex V  to  the 
Seveso III  Directive,  especially  about  how  the  public 
concerned will be warned if there is a major accident; (ii) 
information about appropriate behaviour in the event of a 
major accident; and (iii) the date of the last site visit. 

The  shares  of  UTEs  for  which  information  on  safety 
measures  and  requisite  behaviours  was  actively  made 
available to the public in 2022 in the EU-27 are presented 
in Figure 24. This provision on knowledge is an important 
provision of the Seveso III Directive, as awareness by the 
public  of 
the 
consequences of a major industrial accident. 

information  may  ameliorate 

this 

Figure 24: Share of UTEs for which information on safety 
measures  and  requisite  behaviours  was  actively  made 
available to the public per Member State (%), 2022 

NB: No data available for Greece. 

2022, 

Sources:  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Assessment and summary of Member States’ implementation reports for 
(implementing  Directive 
Implementing  Decision 
2014/896/EU 
2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major  accident  hazards 
involving 
dangerous  substances),  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union, 
Luxembourg, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/94d57d74-735b-11ec-9136-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF/source-search;  eSPIRS  data,  extractions  from  2022  and 
2024;  Analysis  and  summary  of  Member  States'  reports  on 
implementation  of  Directive  2012/18/EU  on  the  control  of  major 
accident hazards involving dangerous substances according to the format 
established  by  Commission  Implementing  Decision  2014/896/EU  - 
Publications  Office  of  the  EU,  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-
detail/-/publication/9bd73087-e9b8-11ef-b5e9-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

In  2022,  Latvia  received  a  priority  action  to  strengthen 
control and enforcement  to  ensure compliance with  the 
Seveso III Directive rules, especially those on the provision 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
of  information  to  the  public.  Some  progress  has  been 
made in that regard. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

• 

Strengthen  compliance  with  requirements  on  safety 
measures  to  prevent  major  accidents  and  ensure 
appropriate preparedness and response in relation to 
UTEs, in particular  as regards reviewing, testing and 
updating  EEPs,  at  intervals  of  no  more  than  three 
years. 
Ensure  access  to  transparent  and  clear  information 
for citizens on risks and behaviour in the event of an 
accident. 

Mercury Regulation 

The  Mercury  Regulation  establishes  measures  and 
conditions concerning the use and storage of and trade in 
mercury,  mercury  compounds  and  mixtures  of  mercury, 
the manufacture and use of and trade in mercury-added 
products and the management of mercury waste, in order 
to ensure a high level of protection of human health and 
the  environment  from  anthropogenic  emissions  and 
releases of mercury and mercury compounds. The revision 
of the Mercury Regulation adopted in 2024 sets out rules 
to address the last intentional uses of mercury in the EU 
by  phasing  out  the  use  of  dental  amalgam  by  1 January 
2025 except when deemed strictly necessary by the dental 
practitioner  based  on  the  specific  medical  needs  of  the 
patient,  and  prohibiting  the  manufacture  and  export  of 
additional mercury-containing lamps from 1 January 2026 
or 1 January 2027 (depending on the lamp category). 

In 2019, 21 % of dental treatments were still using dental 
amalgam,  which  represented  a  challenge  for  Latvia  to 
phase out its use by 1 January 2025. However, measures 
should  have  been  put  in  place  to  ensure  a  socially  and 
economically  sound  phase-out,  including  an  adequate 
reimbursement  of  the  alternatives  to  dental  amalgam 
through the health insurance scheme and the training of 
is  monitoring 
dental  practitioners.  The  Commission 
whether the phase-out  has taken place under  the terms 
and conditions of the regulation. Latvia will also need to 

(97)  Directive  2002/49/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  25 June  2002  relating  to  the  assessment  and 
management  of  environmental  noise –  Declaration  by  the 
Commission  in  the  Conciliation  Committee  on  the  directive 
relating  to  the  assessment  and  management  of  environmental 
noise (OJ L 189, 18.7.2002, p. 12), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32002L0049. 

(98)  WHO,  Environmental  Noise  Guidelines  for  the  European  Region, 
Copenhagen, 
2018, 
https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/978928905356
3. 
These figures are an estimation by the EEA based on (i) the data 
reported  by  Member  States  on  noise  exposure  covered  by 
Directive 2002/49/EC for the round of noise mapping of 2022; (ii) 

(99) 

Latvia  30 

ensure  that  the  manufacture  and  export  of  mercury-
containing lamps are prohibited by the deadlines set out 
in the Mercury Regulation. 

Noise 

The Environmental Noise Directive (97) requires a common 
approach to avoid, prevent and reduce the harmful effects 
of  noise.  The  designated  authorities  are  responsible  for 
making  and  approving  noise  maps  and  action  plans  for 
agglomerations,  major  roads,  major  railways  and  major 
airports.  Member  States  decide  on  noise  limits  that  are 
not  set  at  the  EU  level.  Nevertheless,  the  zero  pollution 
action  plan  sets  as  a  2030  target  a  30 %  reduction 
compared  with  2017  in  the  share  of  people  chronically 
disturbed by transport noise. 

Excessive noise from aircraft, railways and roads is one of 
the main causes of environmental health-related issues in 
the  EU.  It  can  cause  ischaemic  heart  disease,  stroke, 
interrupted sleep, cognitive impairment and stress (98). 

In  Latvia,  environmental  noise  is  estimated  to  cause  at 
least  around  140  cases  of 
ischaemic  heart  disease 
annually (99)  and  some  13 400  people  to  suffer  from 
disturbed sleep(100). 

Based on the latest set of information analysed, Latvia has 
completed noise mapping for airports and major railways, 
roads  and 
whereas  noise  mapping 
agglomerations is partially complete.   

for  major 

Action  plans  for  noise  management  for  agglomerations, 
roads,  railways  and  airports  must  be  updated  and 
submitted  to  the  Commission  every  five  years.  The 
deadline for reporting noise action plans under the most 
recent  reporting  cycle  was  18 January  2025;  these  plans 
have not been assessed yet. 

Latvia received no priority action in this area in the 2022 
EIR. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

Complete noise mapping. 

European  Topic  Centre  on  Air  Pollution,  Transport,  Noise  and 
Industrial  Pollution  (ETC/ATNI),  Noise 
Indicators  under  the 
Environmental Noise Directive 2021: Methodology for estimating 
missing  data,  Eionet  report  ETC/ATNI  No 2021/06,  Kjeller,  2021; 
and  (iii)  the  methodology  for  health  impact  calculations  in 
European  Topic  Centre  on  Air  Pollution  and  Climate  Change 
Mitigation  (ETC/ACM),  Implications  of  environmental  noise  on 
in  Europe,  Eionet  report  ETC/ACM 
health  and  wellbeing 
No 2018/10, 
2018, 
https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-atni/products/etc-atni-
reports/eionet_rep_etcacm_2018_10_healthimplicationsnoise . 

Bilthoven, 

(100)  More information on the adverse health effects of noise pollution 
at: 

is 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/human/noise/noise-2 

available 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
• 

Complete  and/or  implement  action  plans  on  noise 
management. 

will report its findings to the European Parliament and to 
the Council before the end of 2024. 

Latvia  31 

Water quality and management 

EU  legislation  and  policy  requires  that  the  impact  of 
pressures on transitional waters, coastal waters and fresh 
waters  (including  surface  waters  and  groundwater)  be 
significantly reduced. Achieving, maintaining or enhancing 
a  good  status  of  waterbodies  as  defined  by  the  Water 
Framework Directive  will  ensure that EU citizens benefit 
from good-quality and safe drinking and bathing water. It 
will  further  ensure  that  the  nutrient  cycle  (nitrogen  and 
phosphorus)  is  managed  in  a  more  sustainable  and 
resource-efficient way. 

Water Framework Directive 

Directive 
form 

The Water Framework Directive (101) is the cornerstone of 
EU  water  policy  in  the  21st  century (102).  The  Water 
other  water-related 
and 
Framework 
directives (103) 
the  basis  of  sustainable  and 
integrated  water  management  in  the  EU.  They  aim  to 
achieve  a  high  level  of  protection  of  water  resources, 
prevention  of  further  deterioration  and  restoration  to 
good status. These objectives are very important for the 
EU’s  competitiveness,  strategic  autonomy  and  security, 
yet  have  become  even  more  challenging  in  the  face  of 
climate change affecting our precious water resources. 

The Water Framework Directive establishes a procedural 
framework for reaching good surface water ecological and 
chemical  status  and  good  groundwater  quantitative  and 
chemical status. This implies monitoring and classification 
of all waterbodies, assessment  of pressures and impacts 
and identification of the most cost-effective measures to 
achieve the objectives of the directive. The directive dates 
from 2000 and set an initial deadline of 2015 for achieving 
its objectives, with the option to extend the deadline to 
the  end  of  2027.  Every  six  years,  Member  States  must 
report their river basin management plans (RBMPs) to the 
Commission. They should cover river basin districts in their 
countries,  some  of  which  may  be  shared  with  other 
countries. The Commission has assessed the third cycle of 
RBMPs, which were to be submitted by March 2022, and 

(101)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060. 

(102)  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water_en. 
(103)  These 

include 

the  Groundwater  Directive 

(https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32006L0118), 
the  Environmental  Quality  Standards  Directive  (https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/105/oj), 
Directive 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32007L0060), the Bathing Water 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
Directive 
Urban 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32006L0007), 

Floods 

the 

the 

Latvia has 780 surface waterbodies and 25 groundwater 
bodies,  divided  over  four  river  basin  districts  (Daugavas, 
Gauja, Lielupes and Ventas). Approximately 6 % of surface 
waters are designated as ‘heavily modified’ and about 1 % 
are designated as ‘artificial’. Heavily modified and artificial 
waterbodies must reach good ecological potential rather 
than  good  ecological  status,  which  means  that  all 
measures must be taken to mitigate the adverse impact of 
the sustainable human development activities causing the 
waterbody  to  be  heavily  modified /  artificial,  while  not 
significantly affecting these activities. 

show 

Figures 25–28 
the  evolution  of  ecological 
status/potential and of chemical status of surface waters, 
and of quantitative and chemical status of groundwaters 
in 2010, 2015 and 2021. It follows from the assessment of 
the third RBMPs that there has been an improvement in 
the ecological status/potential of surface waterbodies, but 
a  deterioration  in  their  chemical  status,  compared  with 
the status reported in the second RBMPs (covering 2015–
2021). There has been no deterioration in the quantitative 
status  of  groundwater  bodies,  which  are  all  reported  to 
have  good  status,  but  there  has  been  a  deterioration  in 
their chemical status as well. 

Figure 25:  Ecological 
waterbodies in each RBMP cycle (%) 

status/potential  of 

surface 

32.5 %  of  surface  waterbodies  have  good  or  better 
ecological status/potential, representing an improvement 
from the second RBMPs. 

Latvia  has 
surface 
waterbodies,  increasing  the  number  of  river  bodies  by 

re-delineated 

significantly 

its 

Directive 

Directive 

Treatment 

Drinking  Water 

Wastewater 
(https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A31991L0271), 
(https://eur-
new 
the 
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32020L2184), 
Directive 
content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A31991L0676), 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32008L0056) 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32010L0075). 

Nitrates 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
MSFD 

and 

the 

IED 

the 

the 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
142 %.  Significant  progress  has  been  achieved  in  the 
development of assessment methods and monitoring for 
all  biological  quality  elements,  although  challenges  and 
gaps  remain.  The  implementation  of  the  monitoring  of 
coastal and transitional waters was still pending when the 
third RBMPs were developed. 

Figure 26: Chemical status of surface waterbodies in each 
RBMP cycle (%) 

Latvia  32 

All  groundwater  bodies  have  good  quantitative  status. 
There  has  been  a  re-delineation  of  groundwater  bodies, 
which increased from 16 to 25, compared with the second 
RBMPs. 32 % of groundwater bodies are reported to be at 
risk of failing to achieve good quantitative status by 2027. 

It is noted positively that 95.2% of the total groundwater 
body  area  is  subject  to  quantitative  monitoring.  The 
confidence  in  the  assessment  is  prevalently  at  medium 
level.  However,  saline  or  other  intrusions,  and  GWAAEs 
and  GWDTEs  were  not  included  in  the  quantitative 
assessment; a list of these ecosystems was only finalised 
after the adoption of the 3rd RBMPs.  

Figure 28: Chemical status of groundwater bodies in each 
RBMP cycle (%) 

The  percentage  of  surface  waterbodies  with  good 
chemical status decreased from 10.6 % to 0.0 % between 
the third and second RBMPs. The status characterisation 
in the 3rd RBMPs was based on grouping for the first time, 
which explains the apparent deterioration. Furthermore, 
Latvia  has  significantly  re-delineated  its  surface  water 
bodies, hindering direct comparison.  

Regrettably,  Latvia  monitors  only  a  small  percentage 
(12 %) of its surface waterbodies to assess their chemical 
status  due  to 
limited  monitoring  capacities.  More 
positively, Latvia has expanded its monitoring to cover the 
additional  2  new  substances 
the 
included  under 
Environmental Quality Standards Directive in 2013. . 

Failure to achieve good chemical status is mostly due to 
ubiquitous  and  persistent  bioaccumulative  and  toxic 
substances, which are difficult to address and often have 
In  Latvia,  these  are  mainly 
transboundary  sources. 
polycyclic 
and 
heptachlor.  Without  including  uPBT  substances  in  the 
assessment of chemical status, 99% of the surface water 
bodies would be in good status. 

hydrocarbons,  mercury 

aromatic 

Figure 27: Quantitative status of groundwater bodies in 
each RBMP cycle (%) 

The  number  of  groundwater  bodies  with  good  chemical 
status decreased from the  second RBMPs to 88 % in the 
third  RBMPs.  It  is  concerning  that  44 %  of  groundwater 
bodies are reported to be at risk of failing to achieve good 
chemical status by 2027. 

The majority of groundwater bodies fail to achieve good 
chemical status due to the exceedance of thresholds for 
substances, as well as saline or other intrusions. 

Until the end of 2027, Member States can still apply time-
related  exemptions,  subject  to  providing  evidence  of 
compliance  with  the  strict  criteria  set  out  in  the  Water 
Framework  Directive.  After  2027,  the  possibilities  for 
applying exemptions will be much more limited. 

The 2022 EIR identified the following priority actions. 

•  Assess new physical modifications of waterbodies in 
line  with  Article 4(7)  of  the  Water  Framework 
Directive. Consider alternative options and adequate 
mitigation measures in these assessments. 
Facilitate  the 
implementation  of  measures  to 
contribute  to  achieving  the  Water  Framework 
Directive  objectives  and  step  up  efforts  to  improve 
monitoring, in particular monitoring of groundwater. 

• 

Some  progress  has  been  made  regarding  these  priority 
actions, but much remains to be done. 

A point of good practice is that most of Latvia’s significant 
pressures are covered by the key types of measures in the 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

0%20%40% 0% 0%100%1st2nd3rdSWB chemical status for LVGoodFailing to achieve goodUnknown 
 
 
 
Latvia  33 

programme  of  measures.  Almost  a  quarter  of  the 
measures (23 %) have been assigned to KTM14 – research: 
improvement  of  knowledge  base  reducing  uncertainty. 
Monitoring for assessing the status of surface waterbodies 
and  groundwater  bodies  improved  between  the  second 
and third RBMPs, although significant challenges and gaps 
remain. Latvia conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis for 
some measures at a basin/sub-basin/waterbody scale. An 
economic analysis was conducted for hydromorphological 
pressures,  diffuse  pollution 
loads  and  point  source 
pollution loads in all river basin districts. 

2025 priority actions 

Without prejudice to the list of recommended actions in 
the Commission report to the European Parliament and to 
the  Council  on  the  assessment  of  the  third  RBMPs,  the 
following priority actions can be highlighted. 

• 

• 

Improve  river  continuity  and  ecological 
flows, 
boosting efforts on nature-based solutions to reduce 
hydromorphological pressures. 
Ensure  periodic  reviews  of  permits  for  discharges, 
abstractions  and  other  water  uses, 
including 
hydropower pressures. 

•  Reduce  pollution  from  nutrients,  chemicals,  metals 

and saline discharges. 

FRMP  reporting  was  in  March  2016)  to  the  European 
Parliament and to the Council. 

The  main  progress  identified  in  the  assessment  of  the 
second FRMPs is that the plans provide total budgets per 
unit of management, as well as indicative for all measures; 
sources  of  funding  are  specified  for  all  measures; 
objectives  are  measurable  and,  in  particular,  provide 
indicators  and  targets.  A  cost-effectiveness  analysis  was 
used to prioritise structural measures and the results are 
presented  in  the  second  FRMPs.  The  impact  of  climate 
change on the occurrence of floods has been taken into 
consideration  in  the  second  FRMPs,  which  also  refer  to 
projected  climate  impacts  and  provide  references  to 
research  studies.  Furthermore,  measures  were  assessed 
for  their  relevance  to  and  consistency  with  the  national 
climate change adaptation strategy. 

2025 priority actions 

• 

FRMPs  should  provide  details  on  how  the  FHRMs 
were  used  in  the  choice  of  measures  and  how  to 
consider pluvial flooding. 

•  Better explain the choice and implementation of flood 
prevention  and  protection  measures  (prioritisation, 
monitoring, costs of measures). 

•  Better justify exemptions to the achievement of good 

Drinking Water Directive 

• 

status. 
Improve  the  classification  of  water  bodies  and 
strengthen monitoring systems. 

•  Develop  more  robust  programmes  of  measures, 
tackle  obstacles  identified  in  the  implementation  of 
measures  and  ensure  adequate 
for 
implementation, including through better use of the 
cost recovery and polluter pays principle. 

financing 

Floods Directive 

Every six years, following the same reporting cycle as the 
RBMPs,  all  Member  States  report  their  flood  risk 
management  plans  (FRMPs),  based  on  the  flood  hazard 
and  risk  maps  (FHRMs)  and  the  preliminary  flood  risk 
assessments  drawn  up  during  the  second  cycle  (2016–
2021). 

The  Commission  also  assessed  the  FRMPs,  and  in  2024 
reported on both the third RBMPs and second FRMPs (first 

(104)  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/implementing-

decision-drinking-water-directive-watch-list_en. 

(105)  Commission Delegated Decision (EU) 2024/1441 of 11 March 2024 
supplementing  Directive  (EU)  2020/2184  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council by laying down a methodology to 
measure microplastics in water intended for human consumption 
(notified  under  document  C(2024) 1459)  (OJ  L,  2024/1441, 
21.5.2024), http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_del/2024/1441/oj. 
2024/365, 

23.4.2024, 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/365/oj; OJ L, 2024/367, 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/367/oj; 
23.4.2024, 

(106)  OJ L, 

The recast Drinking Water Directive is now applicable, and 
Member States were required to transpose its provisions 
into their national legal systems by 12 January 2023. Since 
into  force  of  the  recast  directive,  the 
the  entry 
Commission  has  adopted 
several  delegated  and 
list  of 
implementing  acts  establishing  (i)  a  watch 
substances  and  compounds  of  concern  for  drinking 
water (104), (ii) a methodology for measuring microplastics 
in drinking water (105) and (iii) an EU system for testing and 
approving materials that will be allowed to be in contact 
with drinking water (106). Member States will have to take 
these  various  Commission  acts 
into  account  when 
implementing the recast directive. 

Finally,  the  Commission  has  now  received  data  from 
Member States on the quality of drinking water in 2017–
2019. 

2024/369, 

OJ L, 
23.4.2024, 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/369/oj;  OJ L,  2024/368, 
23.4.2024, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/368/oj; OJ L, 
2024/370, 
23.4.2024, 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/370/oj;  OJ L,  2024/371, 
23.4.2024,  http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/371/oj;  see 
the  Commission  web  page  on  all  six  delegated  acts  for  more 
information 
(https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/delegated-acts-
drinking-water-directive_en). 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
The  quality  of  drinking  water  (supplied  by  large  water 
suppliers) in Latvia does not give rise to concern (107). From 
January 2026, the European quality standards for per- and 
polyfluoroalkyl  substances  in  drinking  water  will  apply, 
ensuring  harmonised  Member  States’  reporting  of  per- 
and  polyfluoroalkyl  substance  monitoring  data  in  the 
future. 

Bathing Water Directive 

The  Bathing  Water  Directive  requires  Member  States  to 
monitor and assess bathing water. It requires that, during 
the  bathing  season,  Member  States  disseminate  to  the 
public information on bathing water quality actively and 
promptly. In particular, notices banning or advising against 
bathing should be rapidly and easily identifiable. 

Figure 29 shows that in 2023, out of the 59 Latvian bathing 
waters,  44  (74.6 %)  were  of  excellent  quality,  9  (15.3 %) 
were  of  good  quality  and  2  (3.4 %)  were  of  sufficient 
quality. Only one (1.7 %) bathing water was of poor quality 
and three (5.1 %) were not classified. Detailed information 
on  Latvian  bathing  waters  is  available  from  a  national 
portal (108) and through an interactive map viewer of the 
EEA (109). 

Figure 29: Bathing water quality per Member State (%), 
2023 

Source:  EEA,  European  Bathing  Water  Quality 
No 04/2024, 
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-bathing-water-
quality-in-2023/. 

in  2023,  briefing 
2024, 

Copenhagen, 

Latvia  34 

The  latest  Commission  report  on  the  implementation  of 
the Nitrates Directive (111), dating back to 2021, warns that 
nitrates are still causing harmful pollution to water in the 
EU. Excessive nitrates in water are harmful to both human 
health  and  ecosystems,  causing  oxygen  depletion  and 
eutrophication. Cleaning of waters by national authorities 
or  farmers,  where  it  has  been  undertaken,  has  had  a 
positive  impact  on  the  drinking  water  supply  and  on 
biodiversity.  It  has  also  benefited  the  sectors –  such  as 
fisheries and tourism – that depend on biodiversity and on 
a good supply of drinking water. Nevertheless, excessive 
fertilisation remains a  problem in  many parts of the EU. 
implementation  of  the  Nitrates 
The  report  on  the 
Directive covering 2020–2023 will be available in 2025. 

The  analysis  of  Latvia’s  RBMPs  has  identified  nutrients 
from  agriculture  as  an  important  pressure  for  surface 
waters that is affecting these waters’ good status and as 
one of the main factors in not meeting the WFD objectives. 

2025 priority action 

• 

Tackle  nutrient  pollution,  especially  nitrates  from 
agriculture,  through  the 
implementation  of  the 
Nitrates Directive. 

Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive 

The  Urban  Wastewater  Treatment  Directive  (UWWTD) 
aims to protect human health and the environment from 
the effects of untreated urban waste water. It therefore 
requires Member States to collect and treat (secondary or 
biological  treatment)  waste  water  in  all  urban  areas  of 
more  than  2 000  people,  and  to  apply  a  more  stringent 
than  secondary,  with  nitrogen  and/or 
treatment 
phosphorus  removal,  to  the  waste  water  generated  in 
urban areas, also known as agglomerations, of more than 
10 000 people, before they are discharged into waters and 
their  catchments,  when  they  are  sensitive  to  nitrogen 
and/or phosphorus (i.e. eutrophic or tending to become 
eutrophic). 

Overall, in Latvia, the compliance rate was 98 % in 2020. 

Nitrates Directive 

The  Nitrates  Directive (110)  aims  to  protect  water  quality 
across  Europe  by  preventing  nitrates  from  agricultural 
sources that pollute groundwater and surface waters and 
by promoting the use of good farming practices. 

(107) 

In summary, the compliance for all parameter groups in Latvia was 
at least 98.90 % in 2017, 99.32 % in 2018 and 99.12 % in 2019. 

water/state-of-bathing-water. 
(110)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

(108)  https://www.vi.gov.lv/lv/peldudens. 
(109)  EEA, 

‘State  of  bathing  water’,  EEA  website,  2024, 

content/EN/TXT/?qid=1561542776070&uri=CELEX:01991L0676-
20081211. 

https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/bathing-

(111)  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water/nitrates_en. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Figure 30:  Proportion  of  urban  waste  water  that  fully 
complies with the UWWTD (%), 2020 

Latvia  35 

Source:  European  Commission,  12th  UWWTD  Implementation  Report, 
2024. 

towards  energy  neutrality  of 

The  directive has been  revised  in order to, among other 
things,  strengthen  existing  treatment  standards  and 
establish  an  additional  treatment  of  micropollutants  in 
urban  waste  water.  Other  new  requirements  relate  to 
moving 
the  sector, 
establishing an EPR system to ensure sustainable financing 
of  micropollutant  treatment  by  the  most  polluting 
industries and ensuring access to sanitation, especially for 
vulnerable  and  marginalised  groups.  Latvia  has  until 
31 July  2027  to  transpose  the  new  directive  into  its 
national legal system. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Chemicals 

The EU seeks to ensure that chemicals are produced and 
used  in  a  way  that  minimises  any  significant  adverse 
effects on human health and the environment. In October 
2020, the Commission published its chemicals strategy for 
sustainability  towards  a  toxic-free  environment (112), 
which  led  to  some  systemic  changes  in  EU  chemicals 
legislation. The strategy is part of the EU’s zero pollution 
ambition –  a  key  commitment  of  the  European  Green 
Deal. 

The  EU’s  chemicals  legislation (113)  provides  a  baseline 
protection for human health and the environment. It also 
ensures  stability  and  predictability 
for  businesses 
operating in the internal market. 

Since 2007, the Commission has gathered information on 
the  enforcement  of 
the  Registration,  Evaluation, 
Authorisation  and  Restriction  of  Chemicals  (REACH) 
Regulation and the Classification, Labelling and Packaging 
(CLP)  Regulation.  In  December  2020,  the  Commission 
assessed  the  Member  States’  reports (114)  on  the 
implementation 
these 
regulations (115).  It  is  apparent  from  the  Commission’s 
in  the 
report  that  there  are  still  many  disparities 
implementation  of  the  REACH  and  CLP  Regulations, 
notably  in  the  area  of 
law  enforcement.  Recorded 
compliance levels in Member States, generally quite stable 
over time, appear to be getting slightly worse. This may be 
because  (i)  enforcement  authorities  are  becoming  more 

enforcement 

and 

of 

(112)  Communication 

to 

from 

the  Commission 

the  European 
Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions –  Chemicals 
strategy  for  sustainability:  Towards  a  toxic-free  environment, 
COM(2020) 667 
final  of  14 October  2020,  https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2020%3A667%3AFIN;  Regulation 
(EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of 
substances  and  mixtures,  amending  and  repealing  Directives 
67/548/EEC  and  1999/45/EC,  and  amending  Regulation  (EC) 
No 1907/2006 
p. 1), 
L 353, 
https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/c6b6a31d-8359-
11ee-99ba-01aa75ed71a1.0004.02/DOC_2. 

31.12.2008, 

(OJ 

(113)  Namely,  Regulation 

(EC)  No 1907/2006  of  the  European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18 December  2006  concerning 
the  registration,  evaluation,  authorisation  and  restriction  of 
chemicals  (REACH),  establishing  a  European  Chemicals  Agency, 
amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation 
(EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as 
well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 
91/155/EEC,  93/67/EEC,  93/105/EC  and  2000/21/EC  (OJ  L 396, 
30/12/2006, 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32006R1907; and Regulation (EC) 
No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
16 December  2008  on  classification,  labelling  and  packaging  of 
substances  and  mixtures,  amending  and  repealing  Directives 
67/548/EEC  and  1999/45/EC,  and  amending  Regulation  (EC) 
No 1907/2006 
L 353,  31.12.2008,  p. 1),  https://eur-
(OJ 
lex.europa.eu/legal-

p. 1), 

Latvia  36 

effective in detecting non-compliant products/companies 
and (ii) more non-compliant products are being placed on 
the EU market. 

In August 2021, the Commission published a measurable 
assessment  of the enforcement (116) of the two  main EU 
regulations  on  chemicals  using  a  set  of  indicators  on 
different  aspects  of  enforcement.  Since  2021,  the  list  of 
chemicals  subject  to  restrictions  has  been  expanded  as 
new entries have been added to Annex XVII to the REACH 
Regulation (117). 

In  2023,  new  hazard  classes  were  added  to  the  CLP 
Regulation, and the revision of the regulation was tabled 
(published  on  20 November  2024)  (118).  The  new  hazard 
classes  cover  endocrine  disruptors  and  persistence-
related  hazards  while  the  revision  of  the  regulation 
encompasses  new  rules  on  online  sales  to  better  tackle 
non-compliances  observed  over  the  years.  Also  in  2023, 
the  Conference  of  the  Parties  of  the  Stockholm 
Convention (COP) decided to include, in its Annex A (which 
lists  banned  substances),  three  new  chemicals (119).  The 
Commission  is  working  on  the  delegated  acts  to  include 
these  substances  in  Annex I  to  the  Persistent  Organic 
Pollutants Regulation by 2025 at the latest. 

in 
The  Member  States’  reporting  exercise  set  out 
Article 117 of the REACH Regulation and Article 46 of the 
CLP Regulation is conducted every five years. The results 
of  the  coming  one  are  expected  in  2025,  hence  the 
absence  of  new  country-specific  data  on  enforcement 
since 2022. 

content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02008R1272-20221217. 
(114)  European Commission, Technical assistance to review the existing 
Member  States  reporting  questionnaire  under  Articles 117(1)  of 
REACH and 46(2) of CLP – Final report, Publications Office of the 
European 
2020, 
https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/8ee3c69a-bccb-4f22-89ca-
277e35de7c63/library/a4abce8c-8425-455f-b7e6-
0ead917bde6b/details. 
In 
Article 46(2) of the CLP Regulation. 

line  with  Article 117(1)  of  the  REACH  Regulation  and 

Luxembourg, 

Union, 

(115) 

the 

European 

(116)  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Internal  Market, 
Industry,  Entrepreneurship  and  SMEs,  REACH  and  CLP 
Enforcement: EU-level enforcement indicators, Publications Office 
of 
2021, 
Union, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/e5c3e461-0f85-11ec-9151-01aa75ed71a1/. 
(117)  These are substances in tattoo inks and permanent make-up, N,N-
dimethylformamide, formaldehyde (and formaldehyde releasers), 
lead in PVC (polyvinyl chloride), siloxanes (D4, D5, D6) and, finally, 
microplastics. 

Luxembourg, 

(118)  Regulation (EU) 2024/2865 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  23  October  2024  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances 
and mixtures, OJ L, 2024/2865, 20.11.2024, p.1 (Regulation - EU - 
2024/2865 - EN - EUR-Lex). 

(119)  These are methoxychlor, dechlorane plus and UV-328. In the case 
of the pesticide methoxychlor, there are no exemptions from the 
ban. However, for the two plastic additives, dechlorane plus and 
UV-328,  the  COP  decision 
lists  some  time-limited  specific 
exemptions. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  37 

Figure 32:  Number  of  REF-8  checks  performed  per 
100 000 inhabitants (EU average = 1.24) 

In  2022,  the  EIR  reported  that  18  inspectors  were 
allocated  to  enforcement  of  the  REACH  and  CLP 
Regulations in Latvia (120). 

in  an  EU  coordinated 
In  2020,  Latvia  participated 
enforcement  project  on  products  sold  online,  called  the 
REACH-EN-FORCE  (REF)-8  project (121).  The  report  was 
adopted in November 2021, so it could not be taken into 
account in the previous EIR. 

Figure 31: Compliance of imported products – results of 
the REF-8 project (%) 

in 

Latvia’s  participation 
coordinated 
enforcement project was above the EU average, which is 
rather low because of the lack of  involvement of certain 
large Member States. 

the  REF-8 

In this project and others conducted with the help of the 
European Chemicals Agency in the past few years, online 
sales  have  been  proved  to  correspond  consistently  to 
higher non-compliance rates in checks performed across 
the EU, in particular when related to imported products. 

In 2022, Latvia received two priority actions. 

•  Upgrade 

the 

in 
administrative 
implementation and enforcement to move towards a 
policy of zero tolerance of non-compliance. 

capacities 

•  Devise and implement the REACH and CLP Regulation 

enforcement strategies. 

In  the  absence  of  reporting  since  2022,  no  progress  has 
been  shown  and  these  priority  actions  remain  valid  in 
2025. 

2025 priority actions 

•  Upgrade 

the 

in 
administrative 
implementation and enforcement to move towards a 
policy of zero tolerance of non-compliance. 

capacities 

(121)  European Chemicals Agency, REF-8 project report on enforcement 
of the CLP, REACH and BPR duties related to substances, mixtures 
and 
p. 20, 
https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/17088/project_report
_ref-8_en.pdf/ccf2c453-da0e-c185-908e-
3a0343b25802?t=1638885422475. 

Helsinki, 

articles 

online, 

2021, 

sold 

A  risk  approach  was  used  for  the  targeting  of  control 
measures in order to maximise the chances of identifying 
non-compliances.  Therefore,  the  non-compliance  rates 
presented above cannot be considered the average non-
compliance  rates  of  products  in  the  EU.  However,  the 
proportion  of  non-compliance  cases  found  in  the  REF-8 
project are of concern. 

(120)  European Commission, Technical assistance to review the existing 
Member  States  reporting  questionnaire  under  Articles 117(1)  of 
REACH and 46(2) of CLP – Final report, Publications Office of the 
p. 75, 
European 
https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/8ee3c69a-bccb-4f22-89ca-
277e35de7c63/library/a4abce8c-8425-455f-b7e6-
0ead917bde6b/details. 

Luxembourg, 

Union, 

2020, 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
• 

Increase customs checks and checks of products sold 
online  with  regard  to  compliance  with  chemicals 
legislation. 

Latvia  38 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  39 

4. Climate action 

the  EU  has  demonstrated 

The  impacts  of  climate  change  have  continued  to 
increase in recent years, inflicting damage and suffering 
in the EU and around the world. Globally, 2023 was the 
hottest year on record, while Europe has been warming 
twice  as  quickly  as  the  global  average,  and  is  now  the 
fastest-warming  continent.  The  frequency  and  severity 
of  extreme  climate  events  are  also  increasing.  Against 
this  backdrop, 
its 
determination  to  implement  the  European  Green  Deal 
and  to  become  climate  neutral  and  resilient  by  2050, 
ensuring sustainable competitiveness and supporting EU 
industry in the net-zero transition. The European Climate 
Law is the EU’s response to the need for action. It sets 
the objective of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and 
a midterm target of a reduction in GHG emissions of at 
least 55 % by 2030, and outlines the adaptation efforts 
necessary  to  adjust  to  climate  change’s  present  and 
future impacts. Almost  all the  ‘Fit for 55’ proposals set 
out in the European Green Deal have been agreed in law, 
and  the  European  Commission  recommended  a  new 
intermediate  climate  target  of  a  90 %  reduction  in 
In  2024,  the  Member  States 
emissions  by  2040. 
submitted updated national energy and climate plans for 
2021–2030,  reflecting  the  increased  ambition  of  the 
revised EU legislation. In 2024, the European Commission 
jointly  with  the  EEA,  the  first-ever 
also  released, 
European climate risk assessment. 

Over  the  last  three  decades,  since  1990,  the  EU  has 
achieved  steady  decreases  in  its  emissions,  reaching  a 
running total in 2022 of – 32.5 % (122). However, the EU 
and 
its  Member  States  need  to  step  up  their 
implementation  efforts  and  accelerate  emissions 
reduction to stay on track to reach their targets of a 55 % 
reduction  in  net  GHG  emissions  by  2030  and  climate 
neutrality  by  2050.  Between  1990  and  2022,  net  GHG 
emissions  of  Latvia  increased  by  10%,  making  it  one  of 
the countries with a net increase. 

It 

includes 

transition. 

the  green 

The  ‘Fit  for  55’  legislative  package  reflects  the  need  to 
speed  up 
(i) 
strengthening  and  expanding  the  EU  emissions  trading 
system (ETS), with the creation of a new, second, ETS for 
transport and buildings together with a dedicated Social 
Climate  Fund  to  help  citizens  during  the  transition;  (ii) 
increasing  targets  under  the  effort  sharing  regulation; 
and  (iii)  a  revised  regulation  for  Land  Use,  Land  Use 
Change  and  Forestry (123).  The  package  has  been  fully 

adopted,  and 
implementing the legislation. 

the  Member  States  have  been 

The  key  strategic  document  at  country  level  is  the 
National  Energy  and  Climate  Plan  (NECP) (124).  Latvia 
in July  2024  after  the 
submitted 
deadline 
regulation.  The  European 
Commission assessed the plan and the extent to which 
Latvia has followed the recommendations for the draft 
version. The findings from the assessment are: 

its  updated  plan 
set  by 

the 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Emissions  under  the  Effort  Sharing  Regulation  will 
decrease  by  21%  in  2030  compared  to  2005,  and 
Latvia will meet its target of 17%. 
The  latest  projections  show  a  gap  to  the  LULUCF 
target, meaning that current levels of removals have 
been insufficient.  
Latvia  is  in  line  with  its  target  for  the  share  of 
renewable energy. 
There are still gaps in energy efficiency targets that 
must be closed. 

To minimise the impacts of climate policies on vulnerable 
people  and  sectors,  Latvia  is  using  the  Just  Transition 
Fund,  Modernisation  Fund  and  will  use  Social  Climate 
Fund  from  2026  (for  more  information,  see  Chapter 5 
Finance). 

Figure 33: Total GHG emissions (excluding international 
aviation) (%), 1990–2022 

The EU emissions trading system 

The EU ETS is the key tool for reducing  GHG emissions 
cost-effectively across all Member States. It is the world’s 

(122)  EU  net  domestic  emissions,  including  the  LULUCF  sector  and 

deal/fit-55-delivering-proposals_en. 

excluding international aviation. 

(123)  A  full  overview  of  the  Fit  for  55  package  is  available  at 

https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-
2019-2024/european-green-deal/delivering-european-green-

(124)  More  information  about  NECP  is  on  the  dedicated  website 

https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-strategy/national-
energy-and-climate-plans-necps_en. 

 2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
biggest carbon market, covering around 40% of the EU’s 
total  GHG  emissions 
from  electricity  and  heat 
generation, the manufacturing industry, aviation within 
Europe (125) and, from 2024, maritime transport also. 

The  system  sets  a  limit  or  cap  on  the  total  amount  of 
GHGs  that  can  be  emitted  at  the  EU  level.  Within  this 
limit,  companies  buy  emissions  allowances 
(one 
allowance gives the right  to emit 1 t  of  CO2  eq (carbon 
dioxide  equivalent)),  in  auctions  or  through  trading 
allowances with others. The  cap is reduced annually to 
ensure  that  overall  emissions  in  the  sectors  covered 
decrease over time. 

The  emissions  under  the  ETS  decreased  by  23%  from 
2005 to 2023. 

industry  sectors,  cement  and 

In 2023, about half (47 %) of the GHG from Latvia’s ETS 
installations came from power generation, slightly lower 
than the EU average (57 %). Of the total emissions from 
all 
lime  production 
accounted  for  85 %,  with  15 %  coming  from  other 
industries. Since 2019, the power sector has registered 
higher  reductions  (49 %)  than  the  industry  sectors 
(11 %).  Between  2013  and  2019,  GHG  emissions 
fluctuated  in  both  the  power  sector  and  the  industry 
sector, with 2019 levels being 6 % below 2013 levels. 

From 2027, a new emissions trading system, called ETS2, 
for  buildings,  road  transport  and  additional  sectors 
(mainly  industry  not  covered  by  the  current  ETS)  will 
become  fully  operational (126).  Member  States  should 
have  notified  full  transposition  the  provisions  of  the 
revised  EU  ETS  directive  related  to  the  new  ETS2  into 
national law by 30 June 2024. 

Latvia  did  not  communicate  full  transposition  into 
national law by this deadline. The Commission therefore 
opened  an  infringement  procedure  against  Latvia  on 
25 July  2024,  by  sending  a  letter  of  formal  notice  for 
failing to fully transpose the provisions into national law. 

Latvia  had  two  months  to  respond  and  address  the 
shortcomings raised by the Commission. In the absence 
of a  satisfactory response, the Commission may decide 
to issue a reasoned opinion. 

The  Commission  also  opened  infringement  procedures 
against Latvia on 25 January 2024, by sending a letter of 
formal  notice  for  failing  to  fully  transpose  previous 
revisions  of  ETS  directive (127)  into  national  law.  Latvia 
has since  notified  partial  transposition  of  either  one  or 
both  revisions  to  the  Commission.  In  the  absence  of  a 
complete transposition, the Commission may decide to 
issue a reasoned opinion. 

(125)  Flights  between  the  EU  Member  States  including  departing 
flights to Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2023.130.01.0134.01.ENG). 

(EU)  2023/959 

(126)  Directive 

Latvia  40 

Effort sharing 

The  Effort  Sharing  Regulation (ESR) (128)  covers  GHG 
emissions  from  domestic  transport  (excluding  CO₂ 
emissions  from  aviation),  buildings,  agriculture,  small 
industry  and  waste.  Emissions  from  these  sectors 
account for around 60 % of the EU’s domestic emissions. 
The  regulation  sets  the  EU-wide  target  to  reduce 
emissions  from  the  effort  sharing  sectors  by  40 %  by 
2030 compared to 2005 levels. This overall target for the 
EU  translates  to  binding  national  emission  reduction 
targets for each Member State. Latvia‘s target is – 17%. 

In  addition  to  the  2030  targets,  Member  States  have 
annual  GHG  emissions 
(annual  emission 
allocations), reducing every year until 2030. 

limits 

There  is  some  flexibility  to  take  account  of  annual 
fluctuations  in  emissions,  by  trading  emissions  and 
transfers from the ETS and LULUCF. 

Based  on  historical  emissions  and  the  most  updated 
projections  Latvia  is  on  track  to  achieve  its  2030  ESR 
target.  Projected  emission  reduction  is  3.5  percentage 
points above the 2030 target. 

The largest contributor is the domestic transport sector, 
which accounted for 37 % of all effort sharing emissions 
in 2022. 

Sustainable transport has yet to take off in Latvia, which 
has high potential in electrified rail transport. At 0.4 % in 
2022,  the  share  of  battery  electric  vehicles  in  its 
passenger  car  fleet  is  comparatively  low  (EU  average: 
1.2 %). Latvia has 450 publicly accessible charging points 
in 2023, one for every 8 e-vehicles (EU average of 1:10). 
89 % of passenger transport  is by car, but only 46 % of 
freight is transported by road. At 53 % – almost all being 
international  transit –  the  share  of  rail 
in  freight 
transport is far above the EU average (16 %). However, 
only  14 %  of  Latvia’s  rail  network  is  electrified  (EU 
average: 56 %). 

Agriculture  accounted  for  27 %  of  effort  sharing 
emissions  and  remains  an  issue  for  Latvia.  Emissions 
increased by 26 % compared to 2005. 

Buildings accounted for 19 % of effort sharing emissions 
but  remain  a  concern  for  Latvia.  Total  emissions  of 
buildings have decreased by just 6 % since 2005. Energy 
efficiency  gains  slowed  down 
in  Latvia,  although 
significant untapped potential exists. 

(127)  Directive - 2023/959 - EN - EUR-Lex and Directive - 2023/958 - EN 

- EUR-Lex. 
(128)  Regulation 

(EU) 

2018/842 

(https://eur-

lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/842). 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Figure 34: Effort-sharing emissions by sector (%), 2022 

Land use, land-use change and forestry 

The  Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry  (LULUCF) 
sector  plays  a  significant  role  in  achieving  the  EU’s 
climate  neutrality  goal.  In  the  EU,  this  sector  absorbs 
more GHGs than it emits, removing significant volumes 
of carbon from the atmosphere. Thus, it is the only sector 
with negative emissions. 

Latvia’s LULUCF sector has become a net GHG emitter in 
recent years. Latvia’s net carbon removals through land 
use  have  fluctuated  widely  each  year  since  2017  with 
emissions  from  the  sector  doubling  in  the  most  recent 
GHG  inventories.  GHG  emissions  from  cropland  and 
grassland  are  comparatively  high, 
indicating  high 
volumes  of  emissions  from  soils  with  high  organic 
content  and  diminishing  forest  stocks.  Diminishing 
forests and drained peatlands are the main driving force 
behind the LULUCF emissions in the country. 

Latvia‘s  target  in  2030  is  to  enhance  land  removals  by 
additional – 0.6 Mt of CO2 equivalent compared to yearly 
average  of  the  period  2016–2018.  The  latest  available 
projections  show  a  gap  to  target  of  5.5 Mt  of  CO2 
equivalent  in  2030.  Therefore,  Latvia  needs  to  apply 
additional measures to reach its 2030 target. 

Adaptation to climate change 

Halting all GHG emissions would still not prevent climate 
impacts 
that  are  already  occurring.  Therefore, 
adaptation to climate change is also a key component of 
climate policy. 

Latvia  41 

Latvia  has  one  out  of  three  regions  identified  as  a 
hotspots  of  climate  risks  most  affected  by  climate 
change – low-lying coastal regions (129). 

These  coastal  regions  face  the  most  serious  climate 
adaptation challenges. Climate change is affecting many 
sectors,  with  agriculture  and  forestry  most  affected. 
Rising rainfall levels increase flood hazards, and extreme 
weather events such as heatwaves are projected to occur 
more  often.  The  most  climate-sensitive  sectors  are 
agriculture,  infrastructure,  energy  and  transport.  The 
decline  of  biodiversity  and  ecosystem  services  due  to 
climate  change  poses  a  risk  to  the  preservation  and 
sustainable development of Latvia’s natural capital. It is 
key  to  shift  away  from  forestry  and  agriculture 
monocultures and to monitor invasive species and pests 
in order to protect Latvia’s ecosystems. 

Latvia adopted its national adaptation plan in 2018 but 
has  never  updated  it.  There  is  no  national  adaptation 
strategy and no regional adaptation plans. 

Latvia  received  eight  priority  actions  regarding  climate 
action in the 2022 EIR. There is some progress in reducing 
energy  consumption  of  residential  buildings,  but  it  is 
crucial for Latvia to ensure sufficiently ambitious energy 
saving measures for the whole period if it is to achieve 
the  required  amount  of  cumulative  end-use  savings  by 
2030. 

There  is  still  no  little  progress  in  renewable  energy  in 
transport sector. Share of renewables has decreased by 
0.5 percentage points since 2015. 

Latvia  still  reported  EUR 0.15 billion  of  fossil  fuel 
subsidies (FFS) in 2023. 

There is some progress in deployment of solar power, but 
Latvia  needs  to  undertake  more  swift  action  to 
accelerate  renewables  deployment,  notably  for  wind 
power. 

EUR 192 million  under  the  Just  Transition  Fund  will  be 
invested in the country to support a fair transition to a 
investments  will 
climate-neutral  economy.  These 
support the phasing-out of peat for energy generation by 
2030 and peatland restoration. However, there has been 
no  decrease  in  horticultural  peat  extraction,  which 
accounts for 95% of all peat extracted. The shift towards 
sustainable practices in peat industry is very slow. 

Emissions from agriculture have increased by 26 % since 
2005 and are still growing. There is no progress. 

There is a progress in research and innovation activities. 
Latvia  is  an  emerging  innovator.  In  2023,  compared  to 
2021,  Latvia  was  characterised  by  exceptionally  high 

(129)  European Climate Risk Assessment (EUCRA). 2024. Available at 

European Climate Risk Assessment (europa.eu). 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
venture  capital  investment  worth  EUR 59.3 million  in 
clean energy technology start-ups and scale-ups.  

2025 priority action 

• 

Implement all polices and measures that are needed 
to  achieve  targets  laid  down  in  the  Effort  Sharing 

Regulation  (ESR)  and  the  Land  Use  and  Land-Use 
Change  and  Forestry  (LULUCF)  Regulation.  More 
detailed  priority  actions  are  set  out 
in  the 
assessment of the final National Energy and Climate 
Plan (NECP)(130).  

Latvia  42 

130   National energy and climate plans 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Part II: Enabling framework – implementation tools 

5. Financing

Latvia  43 

The EU budget supports climate investment in Latvia with 
significant amounts in 2021–2027, with revenues from the 
ETS  also  feeding  into  the  national  budget.  During  2020–
reached 
2022,  Latvia’s 
EUR 189 million in total, with all of it spent on climate and 
energy. 

from  auctioning 

revenues 

In  addition,  the  annual  investment  needed  to  meet  its 
environmental  objectives 
in  the  areas  of  pollution 
prevention  and  control, the  circular  economy  and  waste, 
water  protection  and  management,  and  biodiversity  and 
ecosystems  is  estimated  to  be  EUR 2 billion  per  year  in 
Latvia. 

These  four  environmental  areas  currently  receive  total 
funding of around EUR 830 million per year; thus, there is 
a gap of EUR 1.2 billion per year. 

Of  the  environmental  investment  gap,  EUR 0.9 billion 
concerns biodiversity and ecosystems, EUR 170 million the 
water  objective,  EUR 67 million  circular  economy  and 
EUR 21 million pollution prevention and control. 

Climate finance landmarks 

EU funding for climate action 

The EU budget supports climate action in the EU-27 with 
EUR 657.8 billion 
in  the  2021–2027  budgetary  period 
across the various programmes and funds, representing an 
overall  34.3 %  contribution  level.  Of  this,  cohesion  policy 
provides  EUR 120 billion  (over  half  of  it  through  the 
European  Regional  Development  Fund 
(ERDF)),  the 
recovery and resilience facility (RRF) EUR 275.7 billion and 
CAP EUR 145.9 billion (131). 

(considering  EU 
In  Latvia,  the  EU  cohesion  policy 
contribution amounts) provides EUR 1.4 billion for climate 
action in 2021–2027 (with around half of this via the ERDF), 
with  a  further  EUR 67.4 million  from  the  European 
Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) (132). 

(131)  European  Commission,  Statement  of  Estimates  of  the  European 
Commission – For the financial year 2025, Publications Office of the 
European 
pp. 94–96, 
Luxembourg, 
https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/7a0420e1-
599e-4246-9131-ccb7d505d6d9_en?filename=DB2025-
Statement-of-Estimates_1.pdf. 

Union, 

2024, 

(132)  See 

the 

Cohesion 

Open 

Data 

Platform 

(https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/). 

The  RRF  contributes  to  climate  finance  in  Latvia  with 
EUR 0.82 billion  up  to  2026,  representing  41.5 %  of  the 
recovery and resilience plan (RRP) (133). 

European 

The 
(EIB)  provided 
Investment  Bank 
EUR 109.9 billion financing across the EU-27 between 2021 
and  mid  2024  to  support  energy,  transport  and  industry 
projects that are aligned with the EU’s climate objectives. 
Of this amount, EUR 100.1 million was assigned to Latvia in 
the reference period (134). 

National financing, including EU emissions trading 
system revenues 

to 

amounted 

EUR 42 million 

Revenues  from  the  auctioning  of  emission  allowances 
under  the  EU  ETS,  which  feed  directly  into  national 
2020, 
budgets, 
EUR 62 million in 2021 and EUR 84 million in 2022 in Latvia, 
totalling EUR 189 million in the three-year period. In Latvia, 
100 %  of  these  revenues  go  to  the  emission  allowance 
auction  instrument,  a  national  green  investment  scheme 
that  aims  to  tackle  global  climate  change.  Reported 
spending shows the actually disbursed amounts per year, 
with all leftovers carried over to future years. 

in 

From the remaining part of the EU ETS revenues that feed 
into  the  Innovation  Fund  and  the  Modernisation  Fund, 
further  support  is  available  to  climate  action  at  the  EU 
level (135). 

the 

It should be noted that investment  in climate action also 
supports 
the 
environmental  investments  described  in  the  following 
sections  cannot  be  regarded  as  entirely  additional  to 
climate investment (136). 

environment 

therefore, 

and, 

Environmental financing and investments 

This  section  describes  Latvia’s  investment  needs,  current 
financing and gaps as they relate to the four environmental 
objectives  beyond  climate  objectives,  namely  tackling 
pollution,  the  circular  economy  and  waste,  water 

and-resilience-scoreboard/index.html). 

(134)  A 

list  of 

financed  projects 

is  provided  by 

the  EIB 

(https://www.eib.org/en/projects/loans/index.htm). 

(135)  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Climate  Action, 
Progress Report 2023 – Climate action, Publications Office of  the 
European 
2023, 
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/news-your-voice/news/climate-
action-progress-report-2023-2023-10-24_en. 

Luxembourg, 

Union, 

(133)  EU  Commission  datasets  and  the  Recovery  and  Resilience 
(https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-

Scoreboard 

(136)  NB:  Indirect  investments  (from  climate  and  other  policies)  in 

support of the environment are accounted for via the tracking. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
protection  and  management,  and  biodiversity  and 
ecosystems (137). 

The environment overall 

Investment needs 

The  overall  environmental 
investment  needs  to  be 
sufficient  to  enable  Latvia  to  meet  its  objectives  in  the 
areas  of  pollution  prevention  and  control,  the  circular 
economy  and  waste,  water  protection  and  management, 
and biodiversity and ecosystems. The required investment 
is estimated to be EUR 2 billion per year (in 2022 prices). 

(b) 

A  significant  part  of  the  estimated  requirement,  around 
EUR 1 billion  per  year,  can  be  attributed  to  the  need  to 
support biodiversity and ecosystems. EUR 0.4 billion a year 
is  required  for  circular  economy,  EUR 0.3 billion  per  year 
for  water  and  EUR 0.2 billion  per  year  for  pollution 
prevention and control (in 2022 prices). 

Current investments 

To implement the environmental investments needed, the 
available  financing  is  estimated  to  currently  reach  an 
annual  EUR 830 million  in  Latvia  from  EU  and  national 
sources combined (in 2022 prices). 

(c) 

(d) 

funding 

Total  environmental 
from  the  multiannual 
financial  framework  (MFF)  is  estimated  to  reach  around 
EUR 1.6 billion  for  Latvia  in  total,  during  2021–2027  (or 
EUR 229.5 million per year). 

Table 1: Key environmental allocations from EU funds to 
Latvia (million EUR), 2021–2027 

Instrument 

Cohesion policy 
ERDF 
Cohesion Fund 
Just Transition Fund 

CAP 
European Agricultural Guarantee Fund 
European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural 
Development 

EMFAF 

Other MFF sources 

RRF (d) (2021–2026) 

(a) 

Allocations 

877.2 (a) 
554.8 
239.8 
82.5 
558.2 (b) 
326.1 
232.1 

46.4 

124.3 (c) 

 379 

Latvia  44 

European  Commission,  2021-2027  cohesion  policy  (planned) 
allocations in EU amount excluding national co-financing, based on 
the  tracking  in  the  Common  Provisions  Regulation  (CPR,  2021) 
Annex I. Please note potential data changes that may have arisen 
between the EIR preparation cut-off date (31 October 2024) and its 
information: 
publication 
https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2021-2027-
Categorisation/2021-2027-Planned-finances-detailed-
categorisation/hgyj-gyin/about_data. 

further 

Source 

date. 

and 

Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  2 December  2021  establishing  rules  on  support  for 
strategic  plans  to  be  drawn  up  by  Member  States  under  the 
common agricultural policy (CAP strategic plans) and financed by 
the  European  Agricultural  Guarantee  Fund  (EAGF)  and  by  the 
European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development  (EAFRD)  and 
repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 
(OJ 
https://eur-
p. 1), 
lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115. 

6.12.2021, 

Annex XI, 

L 435 

Note that 2021-2027 combines factual data for 2021 and 2022 and 
expenditure under the relevant specific objectives (SOs) of the CAP 
strategic  plans  from  2023,  using  the  EU  biodiversity  tracking 
methodology    (https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023-
06/Biodiversity%20tracking%20methodology%20for%20each%20
programme%202023.pdf). Source: European Commission.  

Space  Fund,  Horizon  Europe,  LIFE  and  the  Connecting  Europe 
Facility. 

Outside the MFF.  Note that the RRF applies a similar environmental 
tracking scheme (set in the RRF Regulation, Annex VI) as the EU’s 
cohesion policy. RRF dataset version used: July 2024, prior to 2025 
revisions. Data source: European Commission. 

Latvia,  in  addition  to  receiving  EU  funds  earmarked 
specifically  for  it  in  2021–2027,  can  also  benefit  from 
funding programmes that can be accessed at the EU level 
and  which  are  open  to  all  Member  States.  These  include 
the LIFE programme (EUR 5.4 billion) (138), Horizon Europe 
(EUR 95.5 billion) (139),  the  Connecting  Europe  Facility 
(EUR 33.7 billion) (140)  and  funds  that  can  be  mobilised 
through the InvestEU programme (141). 

Latvia’s RRP supports climate objectives through funding of 
EUR 0.82 billion  (41.5 %  of  total),  with  no  additional 
amount for the environment. 

The EIB provided around EUR 84.5 million in environment-
related financial contributions to Latvia from 2021 to mid 
2024,  most  of  which,  EUR 60 million  (71 %),  concerned 
water investment. 

The  EU’s  total  national  expenditure  on  environmental 
protection  (operating  plus  capital  expenditure)  was 
in  2021, 
EUR 298 billion 
representing  around  2.2 %  of  EU-27  GDP.  In  Latvia,  the 
total  national  environmental  protection  expenditure  was 

in  2020  and  EUR 321 billion 

(137)  Research,  development  and  innovation  is  accounted  under  each 
environmental objective. The financing needs, baselines and gaps 
estimates are based on the Directorate-General for Environment’s 
internal  analysis  (of  2024).  Throughout  this  chapter,  specific 
references are provided to the most important data sources used. 

(138)  https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en. 
(139)  European  Commission,  Horizon  Europe,  https://research-and-
innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-
programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en. 

(140)  The  Connecting  Europe  Facility  Transport  part  also  includes 
EUR 11.3 billion transferred from the Cohesion Fund, of which 30 % 
will be made available, on a competitive basis, to all Member States 
eligible for the Cohesion Fund. The remaining 70 % will respect the 
national envelopes until 31 December 2023. 

(141)  The  InvestEU  Fund  is  set  to  mobilise  over  EUR 372 billion  of 
investment through an EU budget guarantee of EUR 26.2 billion to 
back the investment of financial partners such as the EIB group and 
others. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EUR 357 million  in  2020  and  EUR 412 million  in  2021, 
representing 1.2 % of GDP. 

Latvia  45 

Of  the  total  environmental  expenditure,  the  national 
(investment)  on  environmental 
capital  expenditure 
protection  amounted  to  EUR 54.5 billion  in  2020  and 
EUR 59.9 billion in 2021 in the EU-27, representing around 
the  national 
0.4 %  of 
reached 
environmental 
EUR 115 million in 2020, rising to EUR 150 million in 2021, 
representing around 0.4–0.5 % of GDP. 

the  EU’s  GDP. 
protection 

investment 

In  Latvia, 

Splitting  by  institutional  sector,  23 %  of  Latvia’s  national 
environmental protection investment (capital expenditure) 
comes  from  the  general  government  budget,  with  57 % 
coming  from  specialist  private-sector  producers  (of 
environmental  protection  services,  such  as  waste  and 
water  companies)  and  20 %  from  the  general  business 
sector, whose environmental activities are usually ancillary 
to its main activities. At the EU level, 38 % of environmental 
protection  investment  comes  from  governments,  40 % 
from specialist private-sector producers and 22 % from the 
general business sector (142). 

Latvia’s  total  financing  for  environmental  investment 
reaches  an  estimated  EUR 830 million  per  year  (in  2022 
prices),  including  EU  funding  and  national  public  and 
national private expenditure. Of the total, the share of EU 
fund (including EIB funds) reaches 33 %, with around 67 % 
national  financing.  The  total  public  financing  (EU  plus 
national public) represents 49 % of the total. 

The gap 

To meet its four environmental objectives beyond climate 
change,  the  additional  investment  need  over  the  current 
levels  (i.e.  the  gap)  reaches  an  estimated  EUR 1.2 billion 
per year in Latvia, representing around 3 % of the national 
GDP,  being  considerably  higher  than  the  EU  average 
(0.77 %). 

Figure 35:  Environmental  financing,  needs  and  gaps  per 
Member State (% of GDP) 

Source: Analysis of Directorate-General for Environment. 

The  following  table  provides  the  distributions  of  Latvia’s 
in  various 
environmental 
forms) by environmental objective. 

investment  gap  (expressed 

Table 2:  Summary  of  environmental  investment  gaps  in 
Latvia per year, 2021–2027 

Environmental 
objective 

Investment gap per year 

Million EUR 
(2022 prices) 

% of 
total 

% of 
GDP 

Pollution prevention 
and control 

Circular economy and 
waste 

Water management 
and water industries 

Biodiversity and 
ecosystems 

21 

67 

1.8 

0.1 

5.8 

0.2 

 171 

 14.8 

0.4 

894 

 77.6 

2.3 

Total 

 1 153 

100.0 

3.0 

Source: Directorate-General for Environment analysis. 

Pollution prevention and control 

Investment needs 

In  pollution  prevention  and  control,  Latvia’s  investment 
needs  are  estimated  to  reach  EUR 214 million  per  year 
(including  baseline  investments)  in  2021–2027.  Most  of 
this,  EUR 197 billion,  relates  to  air  pollution  control,  to 
comply with the clean air requirements for the five main air 
pollutants under the NECD by 2030. The estimated needs 

(142)  Eurostat, 

‘Environmental  protection  expenditure  accounts’, 

env_ac_epea. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
to  reduce  environmental  noise  reach  EUR 59 million  per 
year, most of which is delivered by the (same) sustainable 
energy and transport  investments that also benefit  clean 
air (143). Industrial site remediation requires an estimated 
EUR 7 million  per  year.  Microplastics  pollution  and  the 
chemicals  strategy  require  around  EUR 4–6 million  per 
year (each) (144). 

Current investments 

investment 

The  current 
levels  supporting  pollution 
prevention and control reach an estimated EUR 193 million 
per  year  in  Latvia  in  2021–2027.  Most  of  the  financing 
concerns  clean  air  (EUR 164 million  per  year).  Protection 
from environmental noise receives around EUR 54 million 
per year, with a further EUR 10 million for site remediation. 

In  Latvia,  the  EU  MFF  provides  an  estimated  38 %  of  the 
clean  air  financing  (mostly  via  cohesion  policy),  with  a 
further 25 % from the RRF, adding up to 63 % of the total. 
EIB  financing  contributes  2 %  and  national  sources  reach 
36 % (145). 

The gap 

To meet its environmental objectives concerning pollution 
prevention  and  control  (towards  zero  pollution),  Latvia 
needs  to  provide  an  additional  EUR 21 million  per  year 
(0.05 % of GDP), mostly related to clean air and noise. The 
adequate 
the 
investments included for sustainable energy and transport 
would  largely  deliver  this,  while  in  many  Member  States 
additional measures and investments may be required to 
comply with the ammonia reduction requirements. 

implementation  of 

the  NECP  with 

According  to  the  latest  (2023)  NAPCP  review  report (146), 
reduction 
Latvia  did  not  comply  with  ammonia 
requirements  in  2020  and  2021,  while  it  is  not  at  risk  of 
non-compliance  with  ammonia  concerning  the  NECD’s 
2030  emission  reduction  commitments,  based  on  the 
policies and measures in its NAPCP that take into account 
climate, energy and CAP plans and financing baselines. 

Latvia  46 

Circular economy and waste 

Investment needs 

Latvia’s investment  needs in circular  economy and waste 
reach  EUR 416 million  per  year 
(including  baseline 
investments).  Most  of  this,  around  EUR 353 million  per 
year, relates to circular economy measures in the mobility, 
food  and  built  environment  systems,  with  a  further 
EUR 62 million  necessary 
for  waste  management 
(municipal  and  packaging  waste),  covering  waste 
collection,  biowaste  treatment,  recycling  reprocessors, 
waste-sorting  facilities,  and  digitalisation  of  the  waste 
registry. The amount  for waste excludes the investments 
needed for the uptake of circularity and waste prevention 
across the economy (147). 

Current investments 

Circular  economy  investments  across  the  economy  reach 
around  EUR 295 million  per  year  in  Latvia  in  2021-2027, 
with  a 
for  waste 
further  EUR 54 million  provided 
management that does not constitute circular economy. 

Around 4.8 % of this combined financing for circularity and 
waste  comes  from  the  EU  MFF,  with  no  further 
contribution from the RRF. The share of national sources is 
absolutely  overwhelming,  reaching  95.2 %  of  the  total 
financing (148). 

The gap 

investments  by 

To  meet  its  environmental  objectives  concerning  the 
circular  economy  and  waste,  Latvia  needs  to  increase 
circular  economy 
an  estimated 
EUR 58 million  per  year,  with  an  additional  EUR 8 million 
concerning  waste  management  action,  not  belonging  to 
circular 
to 
EUR 67 million  per  year,  representing  0.17 %  of  Latvia’s 
GDP. 

economy.  Combined, 

amounts 

this 

Of  the  circular  economy  gap,  EUR 15 million  relates  to 
recent  initiatives,  such  as  the  eco-design  for  sustainable 

(143)  2021 

Phenomena 

project 
(https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/f4cd7465-a95d-11eb-9585-01aa75ed71a1)  and  the 
Commission’s 2023 Environmental Noise Directive implementation 
(https://environment.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-
report 
03/COM_2023_139_1_EN_ACT_part1_v3.pdf). 

assessment 

(144)  European  Commission,  Third  Clean  Air  Outlook,  Brussels,  2022, 

https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air/clean-air-
outlook_en. See also the impact assessment for the revision of the 
AAQD, available from the Commission web page on the proposed 
revision (https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/revision-
eu-ambient-air-quality-legislation_en). 

(145)  Through  the  tracking  of  EU  funds,  EIB  projects  and  national 
expenditure (EPEA accounts, Eurostat). Note that the bulk of clean 
air financing is provided as a contribution from climate (energy and 
transport) measures, as per the tracking schemes in the Common 
Provisions  Regulation  Annex  I  and  the  RRF  Regulation  Annex  VI. 
Further 
tracking: 
on 
https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/0a80484e-

information 

clean 

air 

2409-4749-94c6-
3b23bc6bae8f_en?filename=Clean%20air%20methodology_0.pdf 
(146)  European Commission, ‘National air pollution control programmes 
and 
website, 
European 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/air/reducing-emissions-
air-pollutants/national-air-pollution-control-programmes-and-
projections_en. 

projections’, 

Commission 

(147)  See Systemiq and Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Achieving ‘Growth 
Within’, 2017; and European Commission: Directorate-General for 
Environment, Study on investment needs in the waste sector and on 
the financing of municipal waste management in Member States, 
Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2019, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/4d5f8355-bcad-11e9-9d01-01aa75ed71a1. 

(148)  Waste management and circular economy expenditure tracking in 
the  EU  funds,  EIB  projects  and  in  the  national  expenditure 
(Eurostat).  Datasets:  EPEA  accounts  (env_epi)  and  circular 
economy private investments (cei_cie012). 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
products,  packaging  and  packaging  waste,  labelling  and 
digital tools, CRM recycling, and measures proposed under 
the  amendment  of  the  Waste  Framework  Directive,  and 
EUR 43 million  constitutes  further  investment  need  to 
unlock Latvia’s circular economy potential. 

Water protection and management 

Investment needs 

The  annual  water  investment  needs  reach  an  estimated 
EUR 342 million  (in  2022  prices)  in  Latvia.  This  comprises 
investment needs both for the water industry and for the 
protection  and  the  management  of  water.  Of  the  total 
annual need, EUR 104 million relates to the management 
of waste water (also including additional costs associated 
with  the  revised  UWWTD).  A  further  EUR 91 million  is 
investments  and 
necessary  for  drinking-water-related 
around 
and 
management of water (149). 

the  protection 

EUR 144 million 

for 

Current investments 

Water  investments  in  Latvia  are  estimated  to  be  around 
EUR 171 million per year (in 2022 prices) in 2021–2027. Of 
this,  EUR 84 million  supports  wastewater  management, 
EUR 67 million drinking water and around EUR  19 million 
the other aspects of the Water Framework Directive (water 
management and protection). 

Of the total financing,  10.5 % is provided by the EU MFF 
(mostly through cohesion policy), with further 1% support 
from  the  RRF.  EIB  financing  is  around  4.7 %  of  the  total, 
while the bulk of financing comes from national sources ( 
83.8 %) (150). 

The gap 

To  meet  the  various  environmental  targets  under  the 
Water  Framework  Directive  and  the  Floods  Directive, 
Latvia’s water investment gap reaches EUR 171 million per 
year (0.44 % of GDP), with EUR 20 million linked to waste 
water.  Drinking  water  measures  require  an  additional 
EUR 24 million per year and the other aspects of the Water 

(149)  See  European  Commission,  ‘Estimating  investment  needs  and 
financing  capacities  for  water-related  investment  in  EU  Member 
2020, 
2  May 
States’, 
https://commission.europa.eu/news/estimating-investment-
needs-and-financing-capacities-water-related-investment-eu-
member-states-2020-05-28_en;  and  OECD 
for 
(Organisation 
Economic  Co-operation  and  Development),  Financing  Water 
Supply, Sanitation and flood Protection: Challenges in EU Member 
States  and  policy  options,  OECD  Publishing,  Paris,  2020, 
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/financing-water-
supply-sanitation-and-flood-protection_6893cdac-en. 

(150)  Water investment levels are estimated through tracking EU funds, 

EIB projects and national expenditure (EPEA accounts, Eurostat). 

(151)  European Commission, ‘Financing Natura 2000 – Prioritised action 
website, 

Commission 

frameworks’, 
European 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-
biodiversity/natura-2000/financing-natura-2000_en. 

Latvia  47 

Framework Directive around EUR 125 million per year over 
the existing levels of financing. 

Biodiversity and ecosystems 

Investment needs 

The investment needs for biodiversity and ecosystems are 
estimated  to  be  EUR 1 billion  per  year  (in  2022  prices)  in 
Latvia in 2021–2027. This includes the following financing 
needs: 

(i)  Latvia’s 

prioritised 
the 

action 
Natura 

framework (151) 
areas: 
2000 

concerning 
EUR 115 million per year, mostly running costs; 
(ii)  additional  BDS  costs (152):  EUR 632 million  per 

year on top of the framework; 

(iii)  sustainable 

soil  management 

costs (153): 

EUR 266 million per year. 

Current investments 

The current level of biodiversity financing is estimated to 
be EUR 119 million per year (in 2022 prices) in 2021–2027. 
53 %  of  this  is  considered  direct  financing  to  biodiversity 
and  ecosystems,  with  a  100 %  coefficient  in  the  tracking 
schemes. 

11.8 % of the total financing is estimated to come from EU 
cohesion  policy,  62.6 %  from  CAP,  7.6 %  from  Horizon 
Europe, around 2.9 % from LIFE and 3.8 % from EMFAF. The 
EU MFF altogether accounts for 89.7 % of the financing and 
the RRF for 1.5 %, adding up to a total of 91.2 % from the 
EU  budget.  The  rest,  8.8 %,  comes  from  national 
sources (154). 

Latvia  has  programmed  17.9 %  of  its  CAP  budget  in 
measures  dedicated  to  support  biodiversity  over  2021–
2027, as well as 3.5 % of its cohesion policy EU contribution 
amount  (disregarding  ESF+).  These  figures  are  below  the 
EU  average  share  of  biodiversity  financing  (Figure 36). 
Latvia was one of the very few Member States that did not 
make use of RRF funding for biodiversity or any other direct 
environmental investment or reform. 

(152)  See  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Biodiversity  Financing  and  Tracking –  Final  report,  Publications 
2022, 
Office 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/793eb6ec-dbd6-11ec-a534-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en. 

European  Union, 

Luxembourg, 

the 

of 

(153)  See Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  on  soil  monitoring  and  resilience  (Soil  Monitoring  Law) 
2023, 
COM(2023) 416 
https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-
directive-soil-monitoring-and-resilience_en. 
in 
biodiversity 

(154)  Based 

tracking 

budget 

5 July 

final 

the 

EU 

on 

of 

(https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/3f466d71-92a7-49eb-9c63-
6cb0fadf29dc/library/8e44293a-d97f-496d-8769-50365780acde), 
and national expenditure into biodiversity from the Classification of 
the Functions of Government accounts. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Figure 36:  2021–2027  contributions  to  biodiversity  from 
the main EU instruments per Member State (% of policy 
total) 

NB: ESF+, European Social Fund Plus. 

The gap 

To  meet  the  environmental  objectives  concerning  the 
protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems 
and  other  relevant  cross-cutting  measures,  Latvia’s 
investment  gap  is  estimated to  be  around  EUR 0.9 billion 
per year, corresponding to 2.3 % of its GDP. 

Public financial management 

Green budgeting practices 

Green  budgeting  refers  to  the  use  of  budgetary  tools  to 
achieve  climate  and  environmental  goals.  Some  Member 
States already use green budgeting tools for identifying and 
tracking green expenditures and/or revenues  (155). Green 
budgeting practices provide increased transparency on the 
environmental implications of budgetary policies. 

The  Commission  has  developed  a  non-mandatory  green 
budgeting  reference  framework  that  brings  together 
methodologies  for  assessing  the  impacts  of  budgets  on 
climate and environmental goals (156). 

To help Member States develop national green budgeting 
and  thereby  improve  policy  coherence  and  support  the 
green  transition,  the  Commission  facilitated  a  technical 
support instrument (TSI) project on green budgeting from 
2021 to 2024 (157). Latvia participated, taking steps towards 

(155)  European  Commission,  Green  Budgeting  in  the  EU.  Key  Insights 
from  the  2023  European  Commission  Survey  of  Green  Budgeting 
Practices, 2023, https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-
and-fiscal-governance/national-fiscal-frameworks-eu-member-
states/green-budgeting-
eu_en#:~:text=European%20Commission%20Green%20Budgeting
%20Survey%C2%A0. 
(156)  European  Commission, 

‘European  Union  green  budgeting 
https://economy-

2022, 

reference 
finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-and-fiscal-governance/green-

framework’, 

Latvia  48 

its own green budgeting framework, with a pilot on green 
tagging planned to be completed in 2025.  

Beyond green budgeting, to improve policy outcomes, the 
Commission  has  also  drawn  up  climate-proofing  and 
sustainability-proofing  guidance (158)  as  tools  to  assess 
project  eligibility  and  compliance  with  environmental 
legislation and criteria. 

Green taxation and tax reform 

Total environmental taxes amounted to EUR 867 million in 
Latvia in 2022, representing 2.2 % of its GDP (EU average: 
2.0 %).  Energy  taxes  formed  the  largest  component  of 
environmental taxes, accounting for 1.8 % of GDP, which is 
higher  than  the  EU  average  of  1.6 %.  Transport  taxes,  at 
0.3 %  of  GDP,  were  under  the  EU  average  (0.4 %),  while 
taxes  on  pollution  and  resources,  at  0.14 %,  were  above 
average (EU average: 0.08 %). 

Figure 37: Environmental taxes per Member State, 2022 

The  EU  Green  Deal  emphasises  the  role  of  well-designed 
tax  reforms  (e.g.  shifts  from  taxing  labour  to  taxing 
pollution) to boost economic growth and resilience, and to 
foster a fairer society and a just transition through the right 
price signals. The Green Deal promotes the ‘polluter-pays 

budgeting-eu_en. 

(157)  https://reform-support.ec.europa.eu/what-we-do/revenue-

administration-and-public-financial-management/supporting-
implementation-green-budgeting-practices-eu_en. 

(158)  Commission notice – Technical guidance on the climate proofing of 
infrastructure in the period 2021–2027 (OJ C 373, 16.09.2021, p. 1), 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/23a24b21-16d0-11ec-b4fe-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
principle’, which makes polluters bear the costs to prevent, 
control and remedy pollution. 

Latvia  49 

study (159), 

to  a  2024 

According 
Latvia  applies 
environmental taxes on various emissions to air, water and 
soil,  as  well  as  product  charges  on  plastic  packaging  and 
bags,  on  hazardous  waste,  on  water  extractions  and  on 
pollutants  in  water,  and  on  natural  resource  (mineral) 
extraction. 

Green bonds and sustainable bonds 

In  2023,  the  total  value  of  the  green  bonds  issued  by 
Member  States  was  USD 245 billion  (EUR 227 billion),  up 
from USD 234 billion (EUR 198 billion) in 2021 (160). 

During  2021–2023  combined,  Latvia  issued  green  bonds 
worth  USD 336 million  (EUR 0.3 billion).  Of  this,  the 
issuance 
to  USD 53 million 
amounted 
(EUR 49 million). 

2023 

in 

During  2014–2023,  83 %  of  the  green  bonds  issued  by 
European  countries  (excluding  supranational  entities) 
served  objectives  in  energy,  buildings  or  transport,  while 
5 %  supported  objectives  in  water,  5.1 %  related  to  land 
use (with links to nature and ecosystems) and 3.8 % applied 
to  waste  management.  By  2023,  the  combined  share  of 
energy, buildings and transport had decreased to 73 %, the 
shares of waste management and land use had increased 
(to 5.9 % and 8.4 %, respectively) and the share of water 
had remained around 5 %. 

In  2021–2023,  31.7 %  of  the  European  green  bonds 
(excluding  supranational issuances) was issued by financial 
corporates, 29.1 % by sovereign governments and 23.1 % 
by  non-financial  corporates.  8.3 %  of  the  issuances  was 
linked 
to 
government-backed  entities,  6.4 % 
developments banks and 1.4 % to local governments. 

to 

Figure 38: Value of green bonds issued per Member State 
(EUR billion), 2021, 2022 and 2023 

Data source: Climatebonds.net, with some additional data from national 
sources (e.g. Croatia, Slovenia). 

Environmentally harmful subsidies 

Addressing  and  phasing  out  environmentally  harmful 
subsidies,  in  particular  FFS,  is  a  further  step  towards 
achieving  the  eighth  environment  action  programme 
objectives and the enabling conditions (161). FFS are costly 
for public budgets and make it difficult to achieve European 
Green Deal objectives. 

The overall downward trend of FFS mentioned in past EIRs 
was disrupted from 2022 due to the European response to 
the 2021 energy crisis and subsequent increase in energy 
prices. 

As  a  direct  consequence,  annual  FFS  in  the  EU  have 
increased to EUR 109 billion in 2023 from EUR 57 billion in 
2020. From 2021 to 2023, there was a marked increase in 
annual FFS of 72 % in the EU (162). 

For the majority of the Member States (16), the year 2022 
saw a peak in the amount of overall FFS. A decline was then 
observed in 2023 (163). In particular, FFS for coal and lignite, 
natural gas and oil increased in 2022 and a strong increase 
was observed for natural gas subsidies. 

In  Latvia,  the  energy  subsidies  increased  significantly 
between  2015  and  2017,  and  stayed  in  the  range  of 
EUR 1.0–1.2 billion  per  year  between  2018  and  2023, 
except  for  2021  (when  a  drop  was  observed).  In  2015–

(159)  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Candidates  for  Taxing  Environmental  Bads  at  National  Level, 
Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2024, 
Annexes 1–2, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/35c1bbdf-2931-11ef-9290-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en. 

(160)  Climate  bonds  initiative  (https://www.climatebonds.net/).  NB. 
Additionally  (and not included in this), national sources indicated 
EUR 544.8 million issuance for Croatia, in 2022-2023, and a slightly 

higher  amount  for  Slovenia  (+0.27  billion)  during  2021-2023  in 
total. 

(161)  Article 3(h) and 3(v) of the eighth environment action programme. 
(162)  European  Commission,  2024  Report  on  Energy  Subsidies  in  the 

European Union, COM(2025). 
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-
register/detail?ref=COM(2025)17&lang=en 

(163)  16 Member States: BE, EE, IE, EL, ES, FR, HR, IT, CY, LT, HU, NL, AT, 

PT, RO and SE. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
2017,  FFS  amounted  to  EUR 0.3 billion  per  year,  before 
decreasing to and mostly staying at around EUR 0.2 billion 
per year. 

As a share of GDP, FFS in 2022 ranged from 1.8 % in Croatia 
to less than 0.1 % in Denmark and Sweden. Latvia’s value 
reached 0.6 %, under the EU average (0.8 %) (164). 

Figure 39: Energy subsidies by energy carrier (EUR billion), 
2015–2023 

Latvia  50 

Priority actions 

The 2022 EIR included the following recommendations for 
Latvia. 

• 

•  Devise  an  environmental 

financing  strategy  to 
maximise  opportunities  for  closing  environmental 
implementation  gaps,  bringing  together  all  relevant 
administrative levels. 
Ensure  an  increased  level  of  financing,  including  by 
further  exploiting  opportunities  in  private  financing, 
for  the  environment  to  cover  the  investment  needs 
identified  across  the  environmental  objectives  and 
prevent significant investment gaps. 

Latvia  currently  has  a  similar  overall  environmental 
investment gap as at the time of the 2022 EIR: around 2.9 % 
of  GDP,  above  the  EU  average.  This  is  predominantly 
related to biodiversity and ecosystems. 

2025 priority action 

With regard to the similar overall investment gap as before, 
a general recommendation is maintained for Latvia. 

•  Use more national funding (for instance by increasing 
taxes  in  favour  of  the  environment  and  reducing 
environmentally  harmful  subsidies),  EU  funding  and 
private funding to help close the investment gap. 

NB: RES, renewable energy source. 
Source: analysis of Directorate-General Energy 

(164)  European  Commission,  2024  Report  on  Energy  Subsidies  in  the 

European Union, COM(2025). 

https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-
register/detail?ref=COM(2025)17&lang=en.  

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6. Environmental governance

Latvia  51 

Information, public participation and access to 
justice 

Citizens  can  more  effectively  protect  the  environment  if 
they rely on the three ‘pillars’ of the Aarhus Convention: 
(i)  access  to  information,  (ii)  public  participation  in 
decision-making and (iii) access to justice in environmental 
matters.  It  is  of  crucial  importance  to  public  authorities, 
the public and businesses that environmental information 
shared  efficiently  and  effectively (165).  Public 
is 
participation  allows  authorities  to  make  decisions  that 
take public concerns into account. Access to justice is a set 
of  guarantees  that  allows  citizens  and  NGOs  to  use 
national courts to protect the environment, safeguard the 
citizens  and  ensure  accountability  of 
rights  of 
authorities (166).  It 
legal 
includes  the  right  to  bring 
challenges (‘legal standing’) (167). 

Environmental information 

This  section  focuses  on  the  implementation  of  the 
Infrastructure  for  Spatial  information  in  the  European 
Community (Inspire) Directive. The Inspire Directive aims 
to set up a European spatial-data infrastructure for sharing 
environmental  spatial 
information  between  public 
authorities across Europe. It is expected that this will help 
policymaking  across  boundaries  and  facilitate  public 
access  to  this  information.  Geographic  information  is 
needed  for  good  governance  at  all  levels  and  should  be 
readily and transparently available. 

Table 3:  Latvia  dashboard  on  implementation  of  the 
Inspire Directive, 2016–2023 

2016 

2023 

Legend 

■ 

effective 

Effective coordination and data sharing  ■ Implementation of 
this  provision  is  well 
Ensure 
advanced  or  (nearly) 
coordination 
completed. 
Outstanding 
issues 
are minor and can be 
easily. 
addressed 
Percentage > 89 % 

without obstacle  ■ 

Inspire performance indicators 

■ 

■ 

sharing 

Data 

(i)  Conformity  of 
metadata 

■ 

(ii)  Conformity  of 
spatial datasets  

■ 

(iii)  Accessibility  of 
spatial 
datasets 
through  view  and 
download services 

■ 

■ 

■ 

■ 

(iv)  Conformity  of 

network services  ■ 

■ 

■ Implementation of 
this  provision  has 
started  and  made 
some  or  substantial 
progress but is still not 
close 
being 
to 
completed. 
Percentage = 31–89 % 

■ Implementation of 
this provision is falling 
significantly  behind. 
Serious  efforts  are 
necessary to close the 
implementation  gap. 
Percentage < 31 % 

Source:  European  Commission, 
https://knowledge-base.inspire.ec.europa.eu/latvia_en. 

‘Latvia’, 

Inspire  Knowledge  Base, 

Inspire 
Latvia’s  performance 
Directive  has  been  reviewed  based  on  its  2023  country 
fiche (168) (see Table 3). 

implementing 

the 

in 

In 2022, Latvia received a  priority action on the need to 
make  spatial  data  more  widely  accessible  and  prioritise 
the  environmental  datasets (169).  Latvia  has  made  some 
progress  on  the  accessibility  of  environmental  data,  but 
more  efforts  are  needed.  Thus  the  priority  action  is 
repeated. 

2018 citizen’s guide (https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/2b362f0a-bfe4-11e8-99ee-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF). 

(167)  This  EIR  focuses  on  the  means  used  by  Member  States  to 
guarantee  rights  of  access  to  justice  and  legal  standing  and  to 
overcome other major barriers to bringing cases on environmental 
protection. 

(168)  European  Commission, 

‘Latvia’, 

Inspire  Knowledge  Base, 

https://knowledge-base.inspire.ec.europa.eu/latvia_en. 

(165)  The 

Aarhus 

Convention 

(https://unece.org/environment-
policy/public-participation/aarhus-convention/text),  the  Access 
to  Environmental  Information  Directive  (Directive  2003/4/EC) 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
Inspire 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32003L0004) 
Directive  (Directive  2007/2/EC)  (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32007L0002) together create a legal 
foundation for the sharing of environmental information between 
public authorities and with the public. 

and 

the 

(166)  These  guarantees  are  explained  in  the  European  Commission’s 
2017  notice  on  access  to  justice  in  environmental  matters 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52017XC0818(02))  and  a  related 

(169)  The  European  Commission  provides  a  list  of  high-value  spatial 
datasets 
(https://github.com/INSPIRE-MIF/need-driven-data-
prioritisation/blob/main/documents/eReporting_PriorityDataList
_V2.1_final_20201008.xlsx). 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Public participation 

Public involvement  at both the planning and the project 
phase  maximises  transparency  and  social  acceptance  of 
programmes  and  projects.  Consultation  with  the  public 
(including  NGOs)  and  environmental,  local  and  regional 
authorities  is  a  key  feature  of  an  effective  impact 
assessment procedure. Such consultation also provides an 
opportunity for public authorities and project promoters 
to  engage  with  the  public  actively  and  meaningfully  by 
making information on the likely significant effects widely 
available. If carried out with due diligence and taking into 
consideration  useful  public  input,  this  process  leads  to 
better-informed decision-making and can promote public 
acceptance.  Making 
increases 
stakeholder  involvement,  thus  lessening  resistance  and 
preventing (or minimising) litigation. On the other hand, it 
is paramount that the procedure is effective. 

information  available 

This  section  examines  how  public 
involvement  and 
transparency are ensured under two instruments, namely 
the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (170) 
and  the  Strategic  Environmental  Assessment 
(SEA) 
Directive (171). 

EU law provides for a flexible framework concerning EIAs. 
The aim of this framework is to ensure the application of 
the  necessary  environmental  safeguards,  while  enabling 
speedy  approval  of  projects.  The  Commission  has 
contributed to simplifying and accelerating permitting for 
renewable energy projects and continues to support the 
Member States in this regard(172).  Latvia has already taken 
steps  aiming  to  accelerate  permit-issuing  procedures 
taking advantages of the broad flexibilities offered by the 
EU legal framework, such as the establishment of one-stop 
shops for renewable energy projects. 

The average speed in the EU for issuing permits involving 
is  20.6 months,  with  a  minimum 
an  EIA  procedure 

(170)  Directive  2011/92/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of 
certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ L 26, 
28.1.2012, 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
p. 1), 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32011L0092. 

(171)  Directive  2001/42/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain 
plans and programmes on the environment (OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, 
p. 30), 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32001L0042. 

(172)  Commission Staff Working Document  (SWD/2022/0149 final), 18 
May 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52022SC0149&qid=1653034229
953). 

2022, 

( 

(173)  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Collection of information and data on the implementation of the 
revised  Environmental 
(EIA)  Directive 
(2011/92/EU) as amended by 2014/52/EU), Publications Office of 
the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2024,  Tables 5  and  6, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/8349a857-2936-11ef-9290-01aa75ed71a1/. 

Impact  Assessment 

Latvia  52 

(screening, 

scoping,  EIA 

duration  of  11.4 months  and  a  maximum  duration  of 
75.7 months (173).  The  duration  of  each  step  in  an  EIA 
process 
report,  public 
consultation, reasoned conclusion, development consent) 
varies  considerably  across  Member  States  and  projects. 
The available data  for  Latvia show that the speed for an 
EIA report is 6–18 months, at least 2 months for reasoned 
conclusions  and  a  maximum  of  36 months 
for 
development consent. Effective use of EU procedures can 
positively  influence  the  timely  approval  of  activities 
underpinning the decarbonisation of the economy on the 
way to net zero by 2050. Latvia exemplifies a streamlined 
EIA procedure that reflects well on the country's capacity 
to organise permitting. 

A new report  is not  yet  available on the application and 
effectiveness of the SEA Directive in the EU. Nevertheless, 
a  support  study has been published with information by 
Member  State (174).VARAM (175)  provides  an  overview  of 
EIA on its website (176), outlining the procedures and the 
legal framework and providing a link to the Environmental 
State  Bureau,  which  is  responsible  for  implementation. 
The  Environmental  State  Bureau  provides 
further 
information,  including  case-specific  information  on  who 
has submitted a proposal, links to related documentation 
and information on when and where public consultation 
hearings will take place (177). Comprehensive information 
on completed EIAs is also published (178), and the website 
has  an  infographic  detailing  the  entire  procedure  for 
carrying out  an EIA, along with a  brief explanation of its 
purpose (179). 

No data could be identified regarding the actual level of 
public participation in EIA and SEA procedures; however, 
the Environmental State Bureau’s annual report for 2020 
expresses concern and states that the public often do not 
find out about such opportunities in a timely manner (180). 

(174)  European  Commission:  Directorate-General  for  Environment, 
Lundberg, P., McNeill, A., McGuinn, J., Cantarelli, A. et al., Study 
supporting  the  preparation  of  the  report  on  the  application  and 
effectiveness  of  the  SEA  Directive  (Directive  2001/42/EC)  –  Final 
study,  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  2025, 
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/1615072 

(175)  Since 1 July 2024, it has been the responsibility of the Ministry of 

Climate and Energy. 

‘Environmental 

(176)  VARAM, 
impact  assessment’,  5 April  2020, 
accessed 
2021, 
https://www.varam.gov.lv/en/environmental-impact-assesment. 

9 October 

(177)

https://www.vpvb.gov.lv/lv/jaunumi?title=&category%5B44
9%5D=449&category%5B461%5D=461&created%5Bmin%5D=--.--
.----&created%5Bmax%5D=--.--.----. 

(178)  https://www.vpvb.gov.lv/lv/ietekmes-uz-vidi-novertejumu-

projekti?combine=&tcat_vid_1%5B677%5D=677&created%5Bmi
n%5D=--.--.----&created%5Bmax%5D=--.--.----. 

(179)  https://www.vpvb.gov.lv/lv/ivn-procedura. 
(180)  State Environmental Bureau, Public annual report of the Ministry 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
Latvia  53 

In  2022,  Latvia  received  a  priority  action  to  address 
concerns  about  the  levels  of  public  engagement  in  EIA 
processes,  including  through  enhanced  publicity  and 
accessibility  of 
information,  allowing  for  the  timely 
identification of current applications. The Commission was 
not  provided  with  updated 
information  regarding 
progress. 

the  court  ruled  that  the  new  diameter  limits  were 
unconstitutional and invalid from their inception (182). 

In  2022,  Latvia  received  a  priority  action  on  access  to 
justice,  namely  to  better  inform  the  public  about  their 
right  to  access  to  justice.  The  Commission  was  not 
provided with updated information regarding progress.  

2025 priority actions 

Access to justice 

Access to justice, guaranteed by Article 19(1) of the Treaty 
on  European  Union  and  Article 47  of  the  EU  Charter  of 
Fundamental Rights, is a fundamental right and part of the 
democratic process. It is vital to ensure the full application 
of EU law in all Member States and the legal protection of 
the  rights  of  individuals,  including  in  environmental 
matters.  Access  to  justice  is  essential  to  enable  judicial 
review of the decisions of public authorities and to allow 
the  correction  of  any  wrongdoing  committed  by  these 
authorities. 

This  section  provides  a  snapshot  of  the  state  of  play  of 
access to courts by the public, particularly when it comes 
to challenging plans, or the non-adoption of plans, under 
EU law, in the areas of water, waste, air quality and noise, 
irrespective of the form of the legal act (i.e. regulatory act 
or administrative decision). 

As  mentioned  in  previous  EIRs,  the  actio  popularis  (the 
right  to  access  to  justice  in  the  public  interest)  in  Latvia 
provides  access  to  justice  in  environmental  matters  to 
both natural and legal persons, and even interest groups 
(unregistered  associations  of  people).  This  means  that 
they have access to administrative authorities and courts 
not only to protect their own individual interests, but also 
to  protect  general  interests  in  terms  of  environmental 
protection. 

justice 

A recent example of active public participation and access 
to 
is  the  court  case  against  the  Latvian 
government’s  decision,  taken  in  summer  2022,  to  allow 
the  felling  of  younger  trees,  which  the  government 
justified with reference to the energy crisis and increased 
demand for wood pellets. Environmental NGOs contested 
the  related  cabinet  regulations (181),  arguing  that  they 
conflicted  with  Article 115  of  the  constitution.  This 
challenge led to the first-ever Constitutional Court review 
of  Latvia’s  forest  management  policies.  On  8 April  2024, 

of Environmental Protection and Regional Protection of the State 
for  2020,  Riga,  2021, 
Environmental  Supervision  Bureau 
https://www.vpvb.gov.lv/lv/media/3554/download. 

(181)  Annex 7  to  Cabinet  Regulation No 935  of  18 December  2012,  as 
amended  by  Cabinet  Regulation  No 374  of  21 June  2022, 
regarding  reducing  the  diameter  of  main  felling  based  on  the 
prevailing tree species and quality. 
(182)  https://www.vestnesis.lv/op/2024/69.2. 
(183)  The  European  Commission  provides  a  list  of  high-value  spatial 
(https://github.com/INSPIRE-MIF/need-driven-data-

datasets 

•  Make  spatial  data  more  widely  accessible  and 
prioritise  environmental  datasets  in  implementing 
the  Inspire  Directive,  especially  those  identified  as 
implementing 
spatial  datasets 
high-value 
environmental legislation (183). 
Ensure  that  relevant  information  on  EIA  and  SEA 
procedures 
(including  on  public  participation 
opportunities and on publication of final decisions) is 
electronically accessible in a timely manner, through 
at least a central portal or easily accessible points of 
access, at the appropriate administrative level. 

for 

• 

Compliance assurance 

Environmental  compliance  assurance  covers  all  work 
undertaken by public authorities to ensure that industries, 
farmers and others fulfil their obligations to protect water, 
air and nature, to manage waste (184) and to remedy any 
environmental  damage.  It  includes  measures  such  as  (i) 
compliance  promotion,  (ii)  compliance  monitoring  (i.e. 
inspections  and  other  checks),  (iii)  enforcement,  that  is, 
steps taken to stop breaches and impose sanctions, and 
(iv) ensuring damage prevention and remediation in line 
with the polluter-pays principle. 

prioritisation/blob/main/documents/eReporting_PriorityDataList
_V2.1_final_20201008.xlsx). 

(184)  The concept is explained in detail in the European Commission’s 
2018  communication  on  EU  actions  to  improve  environmental 
compliance  and  governance  (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52018DC0010)  and  the  related 
(https://eur-
Commission 
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018SC0010). 

document 

working 

staff 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Compliance promotion, monitoring and enforcement 

Source: DG Environment complaints data. 

Latvia  54 

Figure 41: EU complaints per million inhabitants 15 May 
2022-31 December 2024 

Non-compliance  with  environmental  obligations  may 
occur for different reasons, including poor understanding 
or  lack  of  acceptance  of  the  rules,  opportunism  or  even 
criminality.  Compliance  promotion  activities  help  duty-
holders to comply by providing information, guidance and 
other  support.  This  is  particularly  important  in  areas 
where new and complex legislation is put in place. 

When  inspections  and  other  control  activities  identify 
problems,  a  range  of  responses  may  be  appropriate, 
the  use  of  administrative  and  criminal 
including 
enforcement tools. 

While basic data on environmental violations are available 
from the State Environmental Service, there has been little 
progress  on  making  prosecution  outcomes  more 
transparent.  As  mentioned 
EIR, 
comprehensive  follow-up  on  enforcement  actions  and 
detailed case outcomes remain largely unpublished. 

the  2022 

in 

Latvia  has  strengthened  its  approach  to  environmental 
crime  through  international  partnerships,  notably  with 
Norway.  Supported  by  the  EEA  and  Norway  Grants (185), 
Latvia  is  involved  in  joint  training  sessions  focused  on 
regulatory 
sharing 
enforcement practices. This partnership aims to improve 
Latvia’s  capabilities,  especially  regarding  cross-border 
issues  and  complex  cases  involving  pollution  and  waste 
management violations. 

investigative 

techniques 

and 

Between  15 May  2022  and  31 October  2024,  the 
Commission  received  10  complaints  relating  to  the 
environment in Latvia, with 7 being related to nature. In 
terms of complaints per million inhabitants the amount is 
5.87,  well  above  the  EU  average  of  3.2  and  the  fourth-
highest number among all Member States (figures 40 and 
41). 

Figure 40 EU complaints 15 May 2022-31 December 2024

Source:  Eurostat,  ‘Population’  tps00001,  accessed  22  January  2025, 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tps00001/default/tab
le?lang=en, and DG Environment complaints data. 

The  2022  EIR  recommended  that  Latvia:  (i)  improve  the 
availability  of  public  information  on  the  enforcement  of 
environmental  crime;  (ii)  consider  publishing  reports  on 
environmental  inspections  or  providing  more  detailed 
information  on  their  results  and  follow-up;  (iii)  publish 
information  on  institutional  cooperation  and  its  role  in 
enforcement  actions;  (iv)  provide  more  detailed  reports 
on the types of environmental crime, including specifying 
how  many  qualify  as  serious  environmental  crime. 
Concerning  compliance  promotion,  monitoring,  and 
criminal  and  administrative  enforcement,  the  2022 
priority  actions  are  not  assessed  here  due  to  a  lack  of 
systematic information. 

The new EU Environmental Crime Directive 

The EU has recently strengthened its legal framework on 
tackling  the  most  serious  breaches  of  environmental 
obligations,  notably  by  the  adoption  of  the  new 
Environmental  Crime  Directive  (ECD)  (Directive  (EU) 

(185)  https://eeagrants.org/news/together-against-environmental-

crime. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2024/1203) (186) and new sectoral legislation with stronger 
provisions  on  compliance  monitoring,  enforcement  and 
penalties. Issues important for the transposition and the 
implementation  of  the  relevant  new  instruments  are 
highlighted below; a detailed assessment of these topics 
will be included in the next EIR once more implementation 
measures  are  put 
in  place  and  more  systematic 
information is available. 

The  new  ECD  replaced  the  2008  ECD  and  introduced 
several  new  offence  categories,  such  as  unlawful  ship 
recycling,  unlawful  water  abstraction,  and  serious 
legislation  on  chemicals,  mercury, 
breaches  of  EU 
fluorinated GHG and IAS of EU concern. It also covered the 
establishment  of  qualified  offences,  subject  to  more 
severe penalties where one of the offences defined in the 
directive  leads  to  serious  widespread  and  substantial 
damage  or  destruction  of  the  environment.  Concrete 
provisions on the types and levels of penalties for natural 
and  legal  persons  who  commit  an  offence  were  also 
introduced.  Other  provisions  will  help  considerably  to 
improve  the  effectiveness  in  combating  environmental 
crime  of  all  actors  along  the  enforcement  chain.  These 
include  obligations  to  ensure  adequate  resources  and 
investigative  tools,  specialised  regular  training  and  the 
establishment  of  cooperation  mechanisms  within  and 
between Member States as well as national strategies on 
combating environmental crime. 

including  by 

Member  States  are  required  to  transpose  the  new  ECD 
into national law by 21 May 2026 and to take additional 
measures  to  more  effectively  combat  environmental 
crime, 
in  particular  through  training,  coordination, 
cooperation  and  strategic  approaches.  The  Commission 
will  provide  support, 
facilitating  the 
identification  and  sharing  of  good  practices.  Member 
States are expected to ensure the necessary resources and 
specialised  skills  required  and  they  are 
invited  to 
encourage their authorities to support and cooperate with 
the  recognised  EU-level  networks  of  environmental 
enforcement practitioners, such as the EU Network for the 
Implementation  and  Enforcement  of  Environmental 
Law (187),  EnviCrimeNet (188),  the  European  Network  of 
Prosecutors for the Environment (189) and the EU Forum of 
Judges  for  the  Environment (190).  The  European  Union 

(186)    Directive  2024/1203/EU  on  the  protection  of  the  environment 
https://eur-

criminal 

law 

through 
lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1203/oj/eng 

(187)  https://www.impel.eu/en. 
(188) 

LIFE+SATEC 
(https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE2
0-PRE-ES-000001/fight-against-environmental-crime-at-a-
strategic-level-through-the-strengthening-of-envicrimenet-
network-of-experts-in-environmental-criminal-investigations). 

project 

(189)  https://www.environmentalprosecutors.eu. 
(190)  https://www.eufje.org/index.php?lang=en. 
(191 )   Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability with regard to the 
prevention and remedying of environmental damage, https://eur-

Latvia  55 

Agency for Law Enforcement  Cooperation and  European 
Union  Agency 
Justice  Cooperation 
mechanisms for cooperation on cross-border cases should 
be used more systematically for environmental offences. 

for  Criminal 

Environmental Liability Directive 

The  Environmental  Liability  Directive  (ELD)  (191)  aims  to 
ensure that environmental damage is remediated in kind 
at the expense of those who have caused it, in line with 
the polluter-pays principle. It helps to halt the net loss in 
biodiversity,  as  well  as  reducing  the  number  of 
contaminated  sites  and  protecting  the  environmental 
quality of groundwaters and surface waters. The ELD is a 
cross-cutting 
for  better 
tool  and  a  key  enabler 
implementation of EU environmental law. 

The  ELD  addresses  cases  of  significant  environmental 
damage  to  protected  species  and  natural  habitats,  and, 
when caused by operators carrying out certain potentially 
hazardous  activities,  also  damages  to  water  and  to  soil. 
The  Commission  has  the  legal  obligation  to  periodically 
evaluate  the  ELD.  The  ELD  has  undergone  the  second 
evaluation (192), which will be finalised in 2025, and which 
was  supported  by  an  external  study (193),  containing, 
among  other  things,  evidence,  views,  reports  and  other 
relevant information gathered from different stakeholder 
groups, including Member States. 

indicators 

in  assessing 
One  of  the  most  relevant 
implementation  and  enforcement  of  the  ELD  is  the 
number  of  environmental  damage  cases  handled  under 
the  ELD,  especially  when  this  number  is  compared  with 
the  previous  reporting  period.  Fewer  ELD  cases  were 
reported in the second reporting period (2013–2022) than 
in  the  first  one  (2007–2013).  However,  the  downward 
tendency  in  the  number  of  ELD  occurrences  and  their 
overall low number do not necessarily mean that the ELD 
has  achieved  its  objectives,  as  it  needs  to  be  compared 
with the overall number of environmental damage cases, 
some  of  which  may  have  been  handled under  the  other 
liability instruments. 

The ELD has not always been effective in ensuring that the 
polluter  pays,  because  the  liable  operators  often  lack 
financial  capacity  to  carry  out  remediation  measures. 

lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02004L0035-20190626. 

(192)  Commission  staff  working  document  -  Evaluation  of  the 

Environmental Liability Directive, forthcoming 2025. 

(193)  European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment and 
Fogleman,  V.,  Study 
in  support  of  the  evaluation  of  the 
Environmental  Liability  Directive  and  its  implementation –  Final 
report,  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg, 
2024, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-
/publication/006d90e5-980a-11ef-a130-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
Latvia  56 

2025 priority action 
• 

Encourage the use of training programmes provided 
by  the  Commission  (or  developed  at  the  national 
level)  covering the  ELD and its interactions with the 
other national liability-related instruments, to ensure 
more  efficient  ELD  implementation,  improve  the 
expertise  of  the  competent  authorities  and  raise 
awareness among all stakeholder groups. 

While the ELD does not provide for a mandatory financial 
security  system,  it  explicitly  calls  for  Member  States  to 
encourage 
financial  security 
instruments  and  markets,  with  the  aim  of  enabling 
operators  to  use  financial  guarantees  to  cover  their 
responsibilities under this directive. 

the  development  of 

From  1 May  2013  to  30 April  2022,  Latvia  reported  43 
occurrences of environmental damage under the ELD (30 
occurrences of land damage, 7 occurrences of biodiversity 
damage,  4  occurrences  of  water  damage  and  2 
occurrences of land and water damage). In the previous 
reporting  period,  there  were  16  cases  of  environmental 
damage  reported  under  the  ELD  (5  land/soil  damage 
occurrences,  4  water  damage  occurrences  and  7 
biodiversity damage occurrences). The increased number 
of occurrences in Latvia is partly explained by a series of 
criminal acts by one person who intentionally polluted 26 
roadside  locations  with  a  substance  containing  cyanide 
ions;  these  acts  were  reported  as  26  separate  ELD 
occurrences. Latvia is among the Member States with the 
highest overall numbers of reported ELD occurrences. 

Latvia has not introduced mandatory financial security for 
ELD  liabilities.  The  Environmental  Protection  Law  simply 
states  that  operators  may  use  various  financial  security 
instruments, and the demand for such instruments is rare. 
Environmental 
insurance  policies  and  environmental 
extensions to property policies are not generally available. 
Environmental extensions to general liability policies are 
available,  but  the  coverage  provided 
limited  to 
measures  to  remediate  off-site  pollution  from  a  sudden 
and  accidental  incident  on  an  insured  site.  Cover  is  not 
compensatory 
provided 
remediation  under  the  ELD,  the  remediation  of  gradual 
pollution  or  (except  for  an  extension  offered  by  one 
insurer) environmental damage other than pollution. 

complementary 

for 

or 

is 

In  relation  to  the  ELD,  the  2022  EIR  recommended  that 
Latvia improve the guidance materials related to the ELD 
and publish information on institutional cooperation and 
its  role 
in  enforcement  actions.  Latvia  has  made 
substantial  progress  in  enhancing  the  information  and 
materials provided on ELD occurrences. The website of the 
Environment,  Geology  and  Meteorology  Centre  has  a 
database 
lists  contaminated  and  potentially 
contaminated sites, including addresses, types of pollution 
and sources. The State Environmental Service publishes an 
annual  statistics  report  on  pollution  incidents,  including 
information on the region, type of pollution and its cause. 

that 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
EU-supported environmental capacity building 

Finland). 

Latvia  57 

The Commission’s 2023 Compact (194) initiative to enhance 
the administrative space identifies the capacity to lead the 
green transition as one of three key pillars, along with the 
public  administration  skills  agenda  and  the  capacity  for 
Europe’s Digital Decade. Compact also recognises the role 
of  the  EIR  reporting  tool  in  improving  environmental 
governance. The two main capacity-building opportunities 
for 
the  European 
Commission  are  the  TSI (195)  and  the  TAIEX-EIR  PEER  2 
PEER tool (196). The technical assistance available through 
the cohesion policy is subject to shared management and 
is not dealt with in this subsection. 

the  environment  provided  by 

The Commission’s technical support instrument 

The  TSI  provides  Member  States  with  tailor-made 
technical expertise on the design and implementation of 
reforms.  The  support  is  demand  driven  and  does  not 
require national co-financing. 

The Commission’s TSI had annual calls in 2021, 2022, 2023, 
2024  and  2025.  The  following  environment-related 
projects have been selected for Latvia: 

• 

• 

construction, 

in  the  road 

Compliance  with  the  ‘do  no  significant  harm’ 
infrastructure 
(DNSH)  principle 
design, 
and  maintenance 
processes, VSIA Latvijas Valsts Ceļi (2023); 
ESG (197)  risk  management  framework  for  the 
financial  sector,  Financial  and  Capital  Market 
Commission (2023); 

• 

•  GPP  monitoring 

in  Lithuania  and  Latvia, 
Procurement Monitoring Bureau of Latvia (2024); 
Support  for  the  preparation  of  Social  Climate 
Plans  (2024,  multi-country  project  benefiting 
nine Member States: Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, 
Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and 

(194)  See 

the  European  Commission  web  page  on  Compact 
(https://reform-support.ec.europa.eu/public-administration-and-
governance-coordination/enhancing-european-administrative-
space-compact_en). 

(195)  See 

the  European  Commission  web  page  on 

the  TSI 

(https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-
funding/eu-funding-programmes/technical-support-
instrument/technical-support-instrument-tsi_en). 

tool 

(196)  See the European Commission web page on the TAIEX-EIR PEER 2 
(https://environment.ec.europa.eu/law-and-

PEER 
governance/environmental-implementation-review/peer-2-
peer_en).TAIEX: Technical Assistance and Information Exchange. 
(197) 
‘ESG’ here means ‘environmental, social and governance’. 
(198)  Flagship  multi-country  workshops  in  the  reporting  period  are: 
Recast  Drinking    Water  Directive  (3  April  2025);  Environmental 
compliance  and  governance  (18  March  2025);  Planning  of 
Renewable  Energy  Projects  (20  February  2025);  Air  Quality: 
Implementation  of  the  revised  Air  Quality  Directive  (16  January 
2025); Industrial safety: awareness raising of emerging risks linked 
with climate change and decarbonation (12 December 2024); Air 

The Commission’s TAIEX-EIR PEER 2 PEER tool 

The Commission launched the TAIEX-EIR PEER 2 PEER tool 
in 2017. It aims to facilitate peer-to-peer learning among 
Member  States’  environmental  authorities  through 
workshops  (single  or  multi-country),  expert  missions 
(where  a  delegation  of  experts  travels  to  the  requesting 
institution) and study visits (where a delegation from the 
requesting institution travels to a host country). Flagship 
multi-country  workshops  are  those  requested  by  the 
Commission to present new and upcoming environmental 
legislation and policy in all Member States (198). 

Workshops involving Latvia are as follows: 

• 

challenges 
Future 
(24 November  2022)  with 
Presidency; 

for 

protection 
air 
the  Czech  EU 

•  Decentralised  biowaste  recycling  in  Austria  (9–

10 October 2023); 

•  Reducing  air  pollution  from  transport  and 

residential energy (11–13 June 2024); 

•  New  aspects  in  the  cross-border  cooperation 
against  environmental  crime  (19–20 November 
2024). 

Since  the  last  EIR,  Latvia  has  participated  in  one  expert 
mission and one study visit in 2024. The  expert mission on 
nature-based  solutions  and  climate  action  initiatives  for 
the Liepaja smart city roadmap in 24-26 July 2024 was a 
follow-up to the study visit of Liepaja’s officials to Cascais 
in  10-11  January  2024  (on  smart  solutions  for  urban 
sustainability,  environmental  management,  and  citizen 
engagement).  

further 
implementation  of  the  NEC  Directive  to 
quality: 
mainstream  air  and  broader  pollution  reduction  in  agricultural 
policy  (25 September  2024);  Industrial  emissions  transposition 
and implementation of the revised directive (12 September 2024); 
Noise:  progress  towards  meeting  Member  States’  noise  limit 
values and EU reduction targets (5 June 2024); Best practice use 
of  environmental  footprint  methods  on  the  EU  market  (30 May 
2024);  Sustainable  finance  (9 November  2023);  Textile  waste 
separate collection, treatment and markets (3 October 2023); EU 
environmental  funding  and  support  (13 June  2023);  Advisory 
service for businesses to go circular (24 April 2023); Digital product 
passport implementation (6 December 2022); Public involvement 
in  planning  and  approval  of  renewable  energy  projects 
(17 November 2022); Environmental compliance and governance 
(14 November  2022);  Biowaste  management  (19–20 September 
2022); and  Renewable energy projects: permit granting processes 
(13 June 2022). NB: The first flagship workshop on zero pollution 
for air, water and soil took place 9 February 2022. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
 
2025 priority action 

• 

Improve overall national environmental governance, 
in  particular  administrative  capacity  to  support  the 
green transition and coordination at the regional and 
local levels. 

Latvia  58 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  59 

Annex 
2025 priority actions 

Circular economy and waste management 
Transitioning to a circular economy 

• 

• 
• 

• 

• 

•  Adopt measures to increase the circular material use rate. 
• 

Speed  up  the  transition  to  a  circular  economy  by  implementing  an  updated  national  strategy  and  the  EU 
framework and recommendations, in particular to complement it with upstream circularity measures. 
Waste management 
Improve  separate  collection  at  source  e.g.  through  economic  instruments,  investing  in  infrastructure  for 
separate collection, sorting and recycling, and increasing public awareness. 
Improve municipal waste preparation for reuse and recycling. 
Invest in waste prevention measures to reduce the total amount of waste generated. 

Ensure the achievement of the 2025 waste targets, following the recommendations made by the Commission 
in the Early Warning Reports where applicable. 

Biodiversity and natural capital 
Global and EU biodiversity frameworks 

Submit to the CBD an updated NBSAP or national targets following the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global 
Biodiversity Framework. 

Nature protection and restoration – Natura 2000 

•  Complete the Natura 2000 site designation process. 
• 

Ensure the effective implementation of Natura 2000 management plans and sufficient administrative capacity 
and  financing  both  for  Natura  2000  and  the  implementation  of  the  Nature  Restoration  Regulation.  Ensure 
implementation of Prioritised Actions Framework 2021-2027 (PAFs). 

• 

Recovery of species 
Strengthen  the  integration  of  biodiversity  actions  into  other  policies,  e.g.  on  energy,  agriculture,  fisheries, 
forestry,  urban  and  infrastructure  planning  and  sustainable  tourism,  and  promote  communication  between 
stakeholders. 

•  Reinforce action for habitats and species in unfavourable conservation status, for example through restoration 

measures, increased connectivity, better policy coordination and integration, and increased funding. 

Recovery of ecosystems 

• 

Implement eco-schemes and agri-environmental measures and practices to address the environmental needs 
of Latvia. 

•  Promote active management of grasslands through extensive grazing to maintain the condition of these semi-

• 

• 

natural habitats. 
Improve conservation status of forests by promoting sustainable forest management and ensuring compliance 
with the Habitats Directive before granting/renewing permits for forest logging. 
Implement peatland conservation and restoration measures and include such measures and objectives in the 
national restoration plans. 

•  Report updates on the assessment of the state of Latvia’s marine waters, its target and its determinations of 
GES (199), which are expected to include any threshold values for the descriptors in the MSFD that may have 
been established in cooperation with other Member States at the EU or regional level. 
Prevention and management of invasive alien species 

(199) 

In accordance with Article 17 of Directive 2008/56/EC. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
 
Latvia  60 

• 

Step up implementation of the IAS Regulation, including with regard to enforcement and capacity of inspection 
authorities. 

Ecosystem assessment and accounting 
•  Support development of national business and biodiversity network. 
•  Ratify the Nagoya Protocol on  Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of 

Benefits Arising from their Utilization (ABS) to the Convention on Biological Diversity. 

Zero pollution 
Clean air 

•  As part  of  the  NAPCP, take action to reduce emissions of air pollutants. 
• 

Ensure  full  compliance  with  EU  air  quality  standards  and  maintain  downward  emissions  trends  for  air 
pollutants, while reducing the adverse impacts of air pollution on human health and the economy to ensure that 
future concentrations of air pollutants reach WHO guideline values. 

Industrial emissions 

•  Reduce industrial air pollution damage and intensity. 
• 

Engage with industry and environmental NGOs to ensure proper contribution to and implementation of BAT 
conclusions and ensure timely updates to permits following the publication of BAT conclusions. 
Ensure effective public participation and access to justice in relation to the IED. 

• 

• 

• 

Major industrial accidents prevention – Seveso 

Strengthen  compliance  with  requirements  on  safety  measures  to  prevent  major  accidents  and  ensure 
appropriate  preparedness  and  response  in  relation to  UTEs,  in  particular  as  regards  reviewing,  testing  and 
updating EEPs, at intervals of no more than three years. 
Ensure  access  to  transparent  and  clear  information  for  citizens  on  risks  and  behaviour  in  the  event  of  an 
accident. 

•  Complete noise mapping. 
•  Complete and implement action plans on noise management. 

Noise 

• 

• 

Water quality and management 
Improve  river  continuity  and  ecological  flows,  boosting  efforts  on  nature-based  solutions  to  reduce 
hydromorphological pressures. 
Ensure periodic reviews of permits for discharges, abstractions and other water uses, including hydropower 
pressures. 

Improve the classification of water bodies and strengthen monitoring systems. 

•  Reduce pollution from nutrients, chemicals, metals and saline discharges. 
•  Better justify exemptions to the achievement of good status. 
• 
•  Develop more robust programmes of measures, tackle obstacles identified in the implementation of measures 
and  ensure  adequate  financing  for  implementation,  including  through  better  use  of  the  cost  recovery  and 
polluter pays principle. 
FRMPs should provide details on how the FHRMs were used in the choice of measures and  how to consider 
pluvial flooding. 

• 

•  Better  explain the  choice and implementation of  flood prevention and protection measures (prioritisation, 

• 

monitoring, costs of measures). 
Tackle  nutrients  pollution,  especially  nitrates  from  agriculture  through  the  implementation  of  the  Nitrates 
Directive. 

Chemicals 
•  Upgrade the administrative capacities in implementation and enforcement to move towards a policy of zero 

• 

tolerance of non-compliance. 
Increase  customs  checks  and  checks  of  products  sold  online  with  regard  to  compliance  with  chemicals 
legislation. 

Climate action 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia 

 
Latvia  61 

• 

Implement all polices and measures that are needed to achieve targets laid down in the Effort Sharing 
Regulation (ESR) and the Land Use and Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulation. More detailed 
priority actions are set out in the assessment of the final National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP).  

Financing 
•  Use  more  national  funding  (including  by  increasing  taxes  in  favour  of  the  environment  and  reducing 

• 

environmentally harmful subsidies), EU funding and private funding to help close the investment gap. 
Environmental governance 
Information, public participation and access to justice 
•  Make spatial data more widely accessible and prioritise environmental datasets in implementing the Inspire 
Directive, especially those identified as high-value spatial datasets for implementing environmental legislation. 
Ensure that relevant information on EIA and SEA procedures (including on public participation opportunities 
and  on publication  of  final  decisions)  is  electronically  accessible,  through  at  least  a  central  portal  or  easily 
accessible points of access, at the appropriate administrative level. 
Compliance assurance 
Encourage the use of training programmes provided by the Commission (or developed at the national level) 
covering  the  ELD  and  its  interactions  with  the  other  national  liability-related  instruments,  to  ensure  more 
efficient ELD implementation, improve the expertise of the competent authorities and raise awareness among 
all stakeholder groups. 

• 

EU-supported environmental capacity building 

• 

Improve overall national environmental governance, in particular administrative capacity and coordination at 
the regional and local levels between enforcing authorities to support the green transition, through the use of 
EU co-financing. 

2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Latvia