Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 1 Joint Research Centre (JRC) Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ Joint NESIS/SEIS-BASIS Workshop Krakow (Poland) 22 June 2010
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 2 Overview Introduction Progress on BASIS database of monitoring programmes Initial analysis and statement of the problem Examples of SEIS policy options Discussion SEIS the way forward: developing the policy options The contributions of NESIS and BASIS to SEIS
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 3 Background In the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, "Towards a Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS)", the lack of comparability and quality of data has been identified as a serious problem for both Member States and EU Institutions and bodies, since it limits the usability of the data, prohibits efficient assessment of data and their efficient conversion to information tailored to the users needs.
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 4 The overall aims SEIS-BASIS aims to address our current limited understanding of both the comparability and quality of data about the environment. to provide the necessary facts and evidence on which possible Community initiatives will be based.
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 5 Objectives of the project & activities to meet them 1) To provide a baseline assessment of the operational capacity of the 27 EU Member States (plus Norway and Switzerland) when collecting data required for: (a) the implementation of the environmental Acquis, including reporting obligations (b) the integration of environmental concerns in other policies The SEIS-BASIS Information System A survey of EIA and SEA practitioners
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 6 2) To undertake a comparative analysis and fitness-forpurpose assessment of environmental data and related information. i) the survey, also ii) an analysis of the Acquis communautaire for monitoring requirements iii) interviews with thematic community endusers (WISE, CAFE etc.)
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 7 3) Identify and assess policy options that address the gaps and barriers identified in the studies above
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 8 Joint Research Centre (JRC) Progress on BASIS database of monitoring programmes http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 9 Overview Coverage of the database Level of activity and comparison of parameter information by theme: Air quality Biodiversity Waste Water Costs of monitoring Next steps
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 10 Database coverage ~770 programmes from 20 countries (including some partnerships) Largest input from the UK (via the EOF database) and Finland (from 2009 report), plus Swiss submission is full coverage Good coverage for ambient air quality
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 11 No measures were directly entered for Swedish super-programmes (that have many sub-topics) Swiss dataset hyperlinks need to be accessed and processed for measures Cross-thematic monitoring programmes means there is some double (+) counting in the analysis
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 12 Coverage and level of detail of inputs from participating countries
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 13 Level of completeness (and total number of) Air Quality monitoring programmes 100 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 75 10 2 1 106 4 50 % Complete 25 0 Bulgaria Czech Republic Estonia Finland Italy Latvia Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Country
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 14 Most frequently cited measures: Ambient Air Quality (total:233) Measures BG CZ EE FI IT LV PT ES CH UK PM10 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 8 Arsenic 2 1 1 1 1 1 Heavy Metals 1 6 Mercury 1 1 5 Nickel 2 1 1 1 1 1 Benzene 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cadmium 3 1 1 1 1 1 Lead 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Nitrogen Oxide 2 3 1 1 7 PM2.5 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 Carbon Monoxide 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 6 Aerosols and Particulates 1 2 18 Nitrogen Dioxide 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 8 Sulphur Dioxide 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 9 Ozone 4 3 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 14
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 15 Most frequently cited measures: Atmospheric Chemistry and Meteorological Measures BG CZ EE FI IT LV PT ES CH UK Carbon Dioxide 2 1 4 UV 6 1 Clouds 1 9 Temperature 1 Wind Direction 1 9 Air temperature 1 6 Humidity 1 8 Wind Speed 1 1 Rainfall 2 11 CLIMOOR / VULCAN climate change experiment (from the EOF database) is multi-thematic (air quality and nature protection) and a crossborder collaboration (Denmark, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and UK)
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 16 Level of completeness (and total number of) biodiversity/ wildlife monitoring programmes 100 1 75 3 15 1 4 4 391 % Complete 50 25 0 Bulgaria Finland Norway Portugal Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Country
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 17 Most frequently cited measures: biodiversity/wildlife (total: 612) The large number of UK entries produces the following measures under seven main groups: Habitat/site condition (habitat, habitat condition, habitat type) Species (species, macroinvertebrates, macrophytes, diatom, butterflies) Population statistics (counts, size of individuals, abundance, age, lifestage, presence/absence, sex) Physical (ph, alkalinity, temperature) Location (location, map co-ordinates) Metadata (date, collector, determiner) Other (e.g. more methodological: phenological )
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 18 Distribution of biodiversity classes for all documented measures and all countries 250 200 Number of measures 150 100 50 0 metadata species population statistic habitat/site condition Measure Class other location Chemical Physical
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 19 Level of completeness (and total number of) waste monitoring programmes 100 1 1 75 1 1 29 % Complete 50 25 0 Czech Republic Norway Slovakia Switzerland United Kingdom Country
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 20 Most frequently cited measures in waste (total: 72) Class CZ NO CH UK Total Solid Urban Waste 4 2 2 2 1 Organic waste 1 1 Specific waste 3 2 5 Hazardous waste 4 4 Waste water 1 2 7 1 Biological substances 7 7 Chemical substances 1 24 25 Physical parameter 3 3 Environmental quality 6 6 Other 1 1
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 21 Level of completeness (and total number of) water quality monitoring programmes 100 1 75 33 3 7 178 4 % Complete 50 25 0 Finland Norway Slovakia Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Country
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 22 Coverage of water quality parameters: (total: 327) metadata, other, unknown 4% physical 23% chemical 48% biological 25%
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 23 Most frequently cited measures in water quality: biological Measures Finland United Kingdom Total Diatoms 1 1 Chlorophyll 1 6 7 Macroinvertebrates 8 8 Macrophyte 2 12 14
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 24 water quality: chemical Measures Finland Switzerland United Kingdom Total Various chemicals 1 6 7 Water chemistry 9 9 Metals 4 5 9 Cadmium 5 5 Copper 5 5 Lead 4 1 5 Mercury 5 5 Zinc 5 5 Aluminium 3 3 6 dissolved organic carbon 9 9 Oxygen 7 8 15 BOD 5 5 Nutrients 1 2 12 Nitrate 1 1 Phosphates 4 1 5 Phosphorus 8 8 Ammonia 1 1 11 Pesticides 5 5
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 25 Water quality: physical Measures Finland Norway Switzerland United Kingdom Total Alkalinity 1 1 Turbidity 1 4 5 Discharge 1 3 2 6 Conductivity 1 11 12 Flow 1 13 14 Temperature 9 2 1 21 ph 1 21 22
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 26 Coverage of other themes (no. of programmes) Country Chemicals Horizontal Industrial polln. Noise Bulgaria 2 Finland 5 Sweden 5 Switzerland 1 1 1 United Kingdom 50 143 6 1
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 27 Costs of monitoring Wide range of figures for different programmes in each of the themes Very difficult to compare because we are not sure what is being included. For example For Ambient Air Quality- Spain 36 million per year, UK 600,000 per year (but not including local government) For biodiversity- Switzerland 4 million, Sweden 1 million and UK 100,000
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 28 UK DEFRA Environmental Activities: total cost distribution by project type ( millions) 300.00 250.00 247.34 ( millions) 200.00 150.00 203.33 100.00 50.00 Environmental projects Non Environmental Projects
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 29 UK DEFRA Environmental Activities: total costs distribution by macro-theme ( millions) Air Multithematic 14.78 13.82 7.96 Marine and coastal environment Water 25.42 88.88 Waste and resource management and sustainability Agricultural chemicals Biodiversity 34.41 Policy support 61.30
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 30 Finnish costs by theme 4000.00 3000.00 Euros (1000s) 2000.00 1000.00 0.00 Horizontal monitoring Air quality Chemicals and Radiation Nature conservation and resources Water and Marine Theme
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 31 Monitoring and reporting costs distribution across themes Austria Denmark Ireland Poland 1%3% 19% 5% 20% 1% 2% 4% 12% 33% 0% 3% 63% 76% 76% 82% Slovakia Slovenia Sweden United Kingdom 6% 0% 23% 16% 26% 3% 12% 9% 4% 4% 2% 7% 71% 51% 76% 90% Air Water Waste Biodiversity Source: EEA, 2008
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 32 Costs for monitoring and reporting by theme (k ) 16000 14000 12000 10000 38,900 27,660 119,900 AIR WATER WASTE BIODIVERSITY k 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Austria Denmark Germany Ireland Poland Slovakia Slovenia Sweden UK Source: EEA, 2008
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 33 Notes These data are uncertain as they come from rough estimations by MS, which were not provided with a common reporting procedure Water is the most expensive theme (in terms of monitoring and reporting) Clear need of gathering data on monitoring and reporting costs
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 34 Next steps Possible inclusion of all European marine data being followed with EDIOS (excellent matches between databases) Danish report and Dutch database could be processed for entry in SEIS-BASIS but we need help Programme-owner validation is fundamental to help verify existing content, fill in the gaps and take ownership of the database for future use More in-depth analysis needed but we can see a great deal of variation of the level of detail obtained for the database, what is most often being measured and the costs associated with monitoring across countries and themes
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 35 Joint Research Centre (JRC) Initial analysis and statement of the problem http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 36 Outline Issues identified in the 6 th EAP review Increased data-sharing under INSPIRE and SEIS Problems identified in SEIS-BASIS Monitoring requirements in the environmental Acquis Fitness-for-purpose for European policy support, European practice and European policy-making
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 37 In reviewing the 6 th EAP in 2004 it was noted that monitoring and reporting are not conducive either to providing policy makers with the information they need to assess the state of the environment and develop or adjust policies, or, to closing the gap in the knowledge base for environment policy [in terms of]: relevance and quality of monitoring and reporting requirements geographical coverage and timeliness of data (plus limited standards and interoperability) impact on comparability scope and coherence of single-legislation reporting requirements leads to a focus on legal compliance and a limited view of cross-thematic linkages limited prioritisation and focus of requests for information from Member States for monitoring and reporting
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 38 INSPIRE Based on Member States infrastructure, it provides the technological and policy framework to help share environmental and spatial information It will facilitate access, sharing and use of harmonised data It does not affect the way environmental information is collected in the first place
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 39 SEIS Efforts to streamline the content of information requirements in thematic environmental information. Progress in Framework Directives (CAFE, Waste, Marine) and review in nature/biodiversity theme Modernising environmental legislation on information provision. Including increased provision towards e-reporting (e.g. WISE, NOISE)
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 40 SEIS Enabling the more efficient use of available data. INSPIRE draws on important stakeholder community contribution for implementing rules GMES and GEOSS support open data-sharing (with INSPIRE-like services) Data-sharing policy to be reviewed: Aarhus (2003/4/EC) and Re-use of PSI (2003/98/EC) Improving the availability of the information and underlying data. Marine and CAFE directives have become more prescriptive with notable investment such as the European Marine Observations Data Network (EMODNET)
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 41 Monitoring requirements in the environmental Acquis Examining the legislative drivers to produce and share underlying information for many monitoring programmes This covers a range of issues, with a focus on gathering evidence about: Measures/parameters Spatial objects relating to monitoring Geographical Information creation and use (linked to INSPIRE) Focus on Decisions, Directives and Regulations
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 42 Legal acts vary in their composition - WATER: Common Framework and many Directives - BIODIVERSITY: Less legislation but with lots of detail (e.g. annexes). - AIR: Strong legal framework, highly detailed guidance on the spatial location of monitoring facilities - WASTE: Complex legislation and difficult to define what is waste (monitoring) and its spatial objects
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 43 Chemical, physical and biological parameters were repeated many times within and between themes
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 44 e.g. Overlaps in chemical measures in Ambient Air Quality monitoring: VOCs, CO and SO2
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 45 and in waste monitoring
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 46 Reference to GI is more prevalent in recent legislation than older, perhaps impacting on data integration
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 47 INSPIRE Annex I & II Themes for Plant protection products (91/414/EEC) and Community action for sustainable pesticide use (2009/128/EC) 10 9 8 2009/128/EC DIRECT 2009/128/EC INDIRECT 91/414/EEC DIRECT 91/414/EEC INDIRECT Number of References 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Administrative units Addresses Cadastral parcels Transport networks Hydrography Protected sites Land cover Geology Annex I and II Themes
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 48 Such problems point to difficulties in the present form of the legal acts to support integrated environmental assessments The demand for similar physical, chemical and biological parameters within and between themes offers opportunities to re-evaluate monitoring requirements to create and use data fit for many purposes
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 49 Fitness-for-purpose for European policy support Interviews took place with users who draw on datasets for integrated assessment in themes such as: Flooding Biodiversity Soils Forest resources Air Quality Urban assessment
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 50 11 common problems 1. No common European approach and problems of integration: a lack of harmonised data and differing interpretations of tasks. 2. Gaps in data due to organisational issues: differing efforts and data policies which prevent sharing. 3. Variation in quality between themes: limited protocols QA/QC in biodiversity compared to air quality monitoring. 4. Gaps, un-checked outliers, mis-codings and syntax problems can exist for records at all steps in dataflows, including end-products 5. Increase in time spent preparing/analysing data and increased and increasing uncertainty of data comparability: e.g. (re-)processing geographical information and converting data formats
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 51 6. Data are not in a digital format (increasingly rare) 7. Data are not available in a timely fashion, due to the need to validate records. 8. Varying instrumentation can impact on comparability. 9. Having to accept and use data of poor quality. 10.Requests for data are not always well understood and incomplete metadata may not adequately indicate data quality. 11.Limited knowledge about existing datasets, sites or contacts were highlighted, where the SEIS-BASIS information system could have a role.
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 52 Fitness-for-purpose for European practice Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) act as a barometer of ready access to, and use of, environmental information They draw on data from many themes and demonstrate how environmental issues are integrated in other policy areas Bottom-line : varying data access, comparability and quality issues create additional costs of at least 150-200 million per year for practitioners for an activity worth ~ 1 billion
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 53 Fitness-for-purpose for European policy-making For indicator development: there is a lack of up-to-date, reliable data of sufficient quality using harmonised methods, as well as inadequate monitoring differences occur in measures and definitions, monitoring and reporting systems, methodologies, spatial and temporal coverage and gaps in scientific knowledge
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 54 Sources of problems include: a lack of funds and explicit financial support monitoring under the control of different authorities lack of coordination among the involved bodies users and policy makers lacking an awareness of the effects of their actions absence of monitoring programmes insufficient support from international organisations lack appropriate regulatory frameworks
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 55 In 2008, the 25th Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of Community Law noted: shortcomings in knowledge and awareness in national and regional administrations shortcomings in administrative capacities weak national and regional enforcement policies and practices. Derogations often were tied to lack of funds, the presence of heavy workloads and concerns that data were of insufficient quality and reliability. The report highlighted that successful legal implementation comes through effective information-gathering
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 56 Summary Good progress is being made in respect to the streamlining of environmental policy, although cross policy coherence and coordination remains a challenge Newer legislation is taking a more end-to-end approach with guidance on what to monitor and how, and agreed methodologies on developing indicators useful for policy assessment. Significant progress is being made in developing a policy framework and data infrastructure supporting data sharing to support environmental polices, or policies that affect the environment.
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 57 major problems remain at the level of monitoring programmes, which underpin the entire environmental knowledge base Monitoring requirements within and between themes create gaps and overlaps leading to a lack of cross-thematic coherence and difficulties for data integration Information production activities vary in their geographical coverage, timeliness and the quality of the data being created. These problems are caused by a lack of sufficiently binding protocols, methodologies and guidelines for entire dataflows, funding sustainability and incompatibility between historical data series and newer measurements
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 58 These problems continue to pose real challenges to cross-thematic and cross-border analysis, thus requiring action at the Community level.
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 59 Joint Research Centre (JRC) Examples of SEIS policy options http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 60 Policy options Five main policy options aim to address the gaps and barriers identified above: 1. Do Nothing 2. Streamlining and Guidelines 3. Legal Framework 4. Environmental Monitoring Networks 5. Mix of the above
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 61 Option 1: Do Nothing Represents a baseline scenario Existing policies and initiatives develop without additional intervention: Continued streamlining of existing legislation Develop thematic information systems (e.g. WISE, NOISE) and extend use of e-reporting Implementation of INSPIRE services Improving availability of information and data through more prescriptive legislation (e.g. NOISE) Further interoperability of the 10 thematic data centres
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 62 Option 2: Streamlining and Guidelines Address cross-thematic coherence of both the demand (review of the Acquis) and the supply (analysis of monitoring programmes of MSs) Demand: incremental adjustment of new legislation (no overhaul) Supply: development of guidelines adopted on a voluntary basis
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 63 Relevant Questions General- Would non-binding guidelines be enough to ensure coherence of environmental policy and monitoring across Europe? Does it address variations in the extent and quality of monitoring across Europe?
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 64 Option 3: Legal Framework Comprehensive overhaul of all monitoring requirements across all themes to achieve: Coherence of what needs to be monitored Detailed prescription of methods to be used Greater comparability across Europe Avoidance of duplication and redundancies
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 65 Relevant Questions General- Would option 3 respect the principle of proportionality? Would estimated benefits (data collection efficiency and comparability) outweigh the costs of implementation?
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 66 Option 4: Environmental Monitoring Networks Series of new data layers built with common methodologies and instruments across Europe (e.g. IMAGE 2000, BioSoils, LUCAS) Develop new European Monitoring Networks or harmonise national ones (or combination of both?) May be more suitable for certain themes
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 67 Relevant Questions General- What level of granularity would be appropriate? Would option 4 achieve cross-theme coherence needed for integrated assessment?
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 68 Option 5: Policy Mix Combination of two or more of the previous policy options, depending on the strengths and weaknesses of each Achieve optimum balance between objectives and economic/organisational feasibility
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 69 Means of implementation Options could be implemented through: Dedicated financial instruments (grants to MS) Existing Community funding (e.g. cohesion fund, structural funds, RTD financing) National co-financing
Environmental monitoring in Europe: SEIS-BASIS 70 Next steps Discussion and feedback with SEIS Task Force and NESIS representatives (Jun-Sep 10) More evidence from Database (Jun- Sep 10) Consultation with key stakeholders (Sep-Dec 10) Further consultation with SEIS Task Force (Jan-Mar 11)