COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT The EU Environmental Implementation Review Country Report - FINLAND 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 The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common Challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver better results

Council of the European Union

Brussels, 6 February 2017 (OR. en)

5967/17 ADD 12

ENV 103 ECOFIN 70 SOC 68 COMPET 74 POLGEN 9 CONSOM 37

COVER NOTE

From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director

date of receipt: 6 February 2017

To: Mr Jeppe TRANHOLM-MIKKELSEN, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union

No. Cion doc.: SWD(2017) 43 final

Subject: COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

The EU Environmental Implementation Review

Country Report - FINLAND

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

The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common Challenges and

how to combine efforts to deliver better results

Delegations will find attached document SWD(2017) 43 final.

Encl.: SWD(2017) 43 final

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 3.2.2017 SWD(2017) 43 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

The EU Environmental Implementation Review

Country Report - FINLAND

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

The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common Challenges and how to

combine efforts to deliver better results

{COM(2017) 63 final i}

{SWD(2017) 33 - 42 final}

{SWD(2017) 44 - 60 final}

Finland 2

This report has been written by the staff of the Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission. Any comments are welcome to the following e-mail address: ENV-EIR@ec.europa.eu

Finland 3

More information on the European Union is available on the internet ( http://europa.eu ).

Photographs: p.9 – ©LIFE04 ENV/FIN/000299, p.12 – ©anzeletti/iStock, p.18 – ©Oleksiy Mark/iStock, p.23 – ©Arpad Benedek/iStock

For reproduction or use of these photos, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holder.

©European Union, 2017

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 4

PART I: THEMATIC AREAS ............................................................................................................................... 5

• 1. 

  TURNING THE EU INTO A CIRCULAR, RESOURCE-EFFICIENT, GREEN AND COMPETITIVE LOW-

  CARBON ECONOMY ............................................................................................................................... 5

  Developing a circular economy and improving resource efficiency ..................................................... 5

  Waste management .............................................................................................................................. 8

• 2. 

  PROTECTING, CONSERVING AND ENHANCING NATURAL CAPITAL ..................................................... 10

  Nature and Biodiversity ....................................................................................................................... 10

  Estimating natural capital ................................................................................................................... 12

  Green Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................... 12

  Soil protection ..................................................................................................................................... 13

  Marine protection ............................................................................................................................... 13

• 3. 

  ENSURING CITIZENS' HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE .......................................................................... 15

  Air quality ............................................................................................................................................ 15

  Noise ................................................................................................................................................. 16

  Water quality and management ......................................................................................................... 16

  Enhancing the sustainability of cities .................................................................................................. 18

  International agreements ................................................................................................................... 19

PART II: ENABLING FRAMEWORK: IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS ..................................................................... 20

• 4. 

  MARKET BASED INSTRUMENTS AND INVESTMENT ............................................................................ 20

  Green taxation and environmentally harmful subsidies ..................................................................... 20

  Green Public Procurement .................................................................................................................. 20

  Investments: the contribution of EU funds ......................................................................................... 21

• 5. 

  EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE AND KNOWLEDGE ...................................................................................... 22

  Effective governance within central, regional and local government ................................................. 22

  Compliance assurance ......................................................................................................................... 23

  Public participation and access to justice ........................................................................................... 25

Finland 4

Access to information, knowledge and evidence ................................................................................ 25

Finland 5

Executive summary

About the Environmental Implementation Review and rivers, making their protection from impacts of

In May 2016, the Commission launched the agriculture key. Forests cover about 78% of Finland's land Environmental Implementation Review (EIR), a two-year area. Since Finland has based its industrial economy on cycle of analysis, dialogue and collaboration to improve abundant forest resources, sustainable management of the implementation of existing EU environmental policy these resources is crucial for its economic development. and legislation 1 . As a first step, the Commission drafted The responsibility for environmental issues in Finland lies 28 reports describing the main challenges and both with the state and the regions, including opportunities on environmental implementation for each municipalities; hence, effective co-ordination is needed Member State. These reports are meant to stimulate a within a system of multi-level governance.

positive debate both on shared environmental challenges Main Challenges

for the EU, as well as on the most effective ways to

address the key implementation gaps. The reports rely on The two main challenges with regard to implementation the detailed sectoral implementation reports collected or of EU environmental policy and law in Finland are:

issued by the Commission under specific environmental  Improve air quality (NO2) around Helsinki. legislation as well as the 2015 State of the Environment  Reduce diffuse pollution from agriculture causing Report and other reports by the European Environment deteriorated water quality.

Agency. These reports will not replace the specific

instruments to ensure compliance with the EU legal Main Opportunities

obligations.

Finland has opportunities to perform better in areas

The reports will broadly follow the outline of the 7th where there is already a good knowledge base and good

Environmental Action Programme 2 and refer to the 2030 practices. This applies in particular to:

Agenda for Sustainable development and related

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3 to the extent to  Activities on the circular economy which could which they reflect the existing obligations and policy increase Finland's resource productivity. objectives of EU environmental law 4 .  A reduction in high levels of incineration by

The main challenges have been selected by taking into favouring recycling of municipal waste.

account factors such as the importance or the gravity of

the environmental implementation issue in the light of Points of Excellence

the impact on the quality of life of the citizens, the Where Finland is a leader on environmental distance to target, and financial implications. implementation, innovative approaches could be shared

The reports accompany the Communication "The EU more widely with other countries. Good examples are:

Environmental Implementation Review 2016: Common  The recently started large scale LIFE Integrated challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver better Project "FRESHABIT" is an important demonstration results", which identifies challenges that are common to project on how to engage different sectors in the several Member States, provides preliminary conclusions implementation of the Water Framework Directive on possible root causes of implementation gaps and and the Nature Directives; the results of this study proposes joint actions to deliver better results. It also could be widely applied in future.

groups in its Annex the actions proposed in each country  Finland is especially advanced in the process for the report to improve implementation at national level. designation of protected Natura 2000 sites as Special

General profile Areas of Conservation (SACs), which sets the basis

for a successful management of such sites. Finland is rich in surface waters with many lakes, ponds

1 Communication "Delivering the benefits of EU environmental policies through a regular Environmental Implementation Review"

(COM/2016/ 316 final). 2 Decision No. 1386/2013/EU of 20 November 2013 on a General Union

Environmental Action Programme to 2020 " Living well, within the limits of our planet ".

3 United Nations, 2015. The Sustainable Development Goals

4 This EIR report does not cover climate change, chemicals and energy.

Finland 5

Part I: Thematic Areas

• 1. 

  Turning the EU into a circular, resource-efficient, green and

  competitive low-carbon economy

  Figure 1: Resource productivity 2003-15 7

Developing a circular economy and improving resource efficiency

The 2015 Circular Economy Package emphasizes the need to move towards a lifecycle-driven ‘circular’ economy, with a cascading use of resources and residual waste that is close to zero. This can be facilitated by the development of, and access to, innovative financial instruments and funding for eco-innovation.

SDG 8 invites countries to promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. SDG 9 highlights the need to build resilient

infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable The bioeconomy and clean solutions have been

industrialization and foster innovation. SDG 12 established as key high-level policy priorities in the encourages countries to achieve the sustainable Strategic Programme of the Finnish Government from

management and efficient use of natural resources 2016 onwards

8 , and related national and regional

initiatives are manifold. Both start-ups and established

by 2030. companies generate technologies, products and services

in several sectors relevant to eco-innovations and the

Measures towards a circular economy circular economy.

Transforming our economies from linear to circular offers One of the most important high-level steps towards a an opportunity to reinvent them and make them more circular economy in the country has been the inclusion of sustainable and competitive. This will stimulate circular economy as a key policy priority in the investments and bring both short and long-term benefits abovementioned Strategic Programme. The Finnish

for the economy, environment and citizens alike 5 . Government has allocated EUR 300 million extra funding to strategic development and investments on

In the longer term, the themes of cleantech, bioeconomy bioeconomy, circular economy and cleantech for the and digitalisation can help improve Finland's resource years 2016-2018. In addition to public funding, this

productivity 6 and progress towards a more circular choice signals broad political support for making the

economy and better resource efficiency, which will economy and industry more circular in the longer term. stimulate investments and have short-term and longterm

benefits for the economy, environment and The Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy

employment. also published the Strategy to Promote Cleantech Business in Finland in 2014, which continues to guide

Finland had a resource productivity (how efficiently the policymaking and business initiatives. Additional economy uses material resources to produce wealth) of strategies and programmes relevant to eco-innovations 1.12 EUR/kg below EU average, which is 2) in 2015. As and the circular economy include the Finnish shown in Figure 1, Finland's resource productivity has not Bioeconomy Strategy (2014), the Finnish Material significantly increased since 2003. Efficiency Programme (2014), the national Roadmap for

Circular Economy (2016) and the new Circular Economy focus area (2016) in Sitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund.

Besides Finland's own activities and initiatives, as a key

5 European Commission, 2015. Proposed Circular Economy Package

6 Resource productivity is defined as the ratio between gross domestic 7 Eurostat, Resource productivity , accessed October 2016 product (GDP) and domestic material consumption (DMC). 8 Strategic Programme of the Finnish Government from 2016

Finland 6

priority, a strong platform for green growth has emerged Finland's SMEs have invested up to 5% of their annual between the Nordic countries through the Nordic Council turnover in their resource efficiency actions (EU28 and the Nordic Council of Ministers – Green Growth the average 50%), 36% of them are currently offering green Nordic Way. products and services (EU28 average 26%), 63% took

Cleantech remains one of Finland’s fastest growing measures to save energy (EU28 average 59%), 64% to business sectors. It employs around 50,000 people, and minimise waste (EU28 average 60%), 36% to save water 40,000 new jobs are expected by 2020. The government (EU28 average 44%), and 71% to save materials (EU28 also aims to raise the turnover of Finnish cleantech average 54%). From a circular economy perspective, 35% companies to EUR 50 billion by 2020. Importantly, Finnish took measures to recycle by reusing material or waste cleantech start-ups received around EUR 50 million or within the company (EU28 average 40%), 30% to design 20% of all foreign and domestic equity investments in products that are easier to maintain, repair or reuse

Finnish start-ups in 2015. (EU28 average 22%) and 25% were able to sell their scrap material to another company (EU28 average 25%).

Environmental taxation is one of the more important

parts of the related policy landscape. In 2014, Finland’s According to the Flash 426 Eurobarometer, the resource revenue from environmental taxation, 2.9% of gross efficiency actions undertaken allowed the reduction of domestic product, was above the EU average of 2.5%. production costs in a 54% of the Finland's SMEs (EU28 The share of environmental taxes in tax revenues has average 45%).

also gradually increased, while the composition has The number of SMEs in the non-financial business changed: taxes on carbon dioxide from heating, power economy is in line with the EU average. Nearly all plants and machinery as well as the waste tax have all businesses are SMEs, providing two out of three jobs and been gradually increased. 60% of total value added. SME productivity, measured as

Finland has set up a Smart Procurement programme for value added per head, is well above the EU average.

2013–2016 with the focus on creating smart demand, The Flash 426 Eurobarometer "SMEs, resource efficiency which will provide the prerequisites for new market and green markets" shows that 50% of the SMEs in creation and growth. Finland have one or more full time employee working in

Ministries together with Motiva Ltd (state-owned expert a green job at least some of the time (EU28 average company in energy and material efficiency) have 35%). Finland has an average number of 1.7 full time launched several initiatives to boost resource efficiency green employees per SME, the same as the EU28 and circular economy. average)

9 .

For example, Motiva Ltd provides material efficiency

auditing services for companies. The Government funds Eco-innovation

the auditing programme and companies may receive Finland continues to demonstrate high performance in economic incentives for audits. terms of eco-innovation. As in 2013, Finland is again

At national level, Motiva Ltd coordinates the Finnish ranked second in the EU28 Eco-innovation Index in 2015,

Industrial Symbiosis System (FISS) network, which aims at with an overall score that exceeds the EU average by 40% collecting information on resources, matchmaking actors as shown in Figure 2.

and driving forward resource synergies. FISS for example In 2014, Finland was fourth in the ranking. National runs a database to identify possible synergies between experts agree with the depiction in the index of industries regarding resource use, and collects particularly high eco-innovation performance. Similarly, information on the impact of industrial collaboration on as in the overall score, Finland’s track record in terms of environment and economy. different Eco-IS components has been largely consistent

There are also two platforms (Fisu and Hinku), which since 2011, with particular strengths and weaknesses.

both aim at creating solutions that have economic and The 2014 Research and Innovation Country Report for social benefits as well as environmental advantages. Both Finland by the European Commission provides insights networks bring around 40 municipalities, businesses, into the general barriers and drivers to eco-innovation in citizens and experts together to create and carry out the country. As mentioned, one of the key challenges solutions to improve resource-efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

9 European Commission, 2015. The Flash 426 Eurobarometer "SMEs,

resource efficiency and green markets" defines "green job" as a job

SMEs and resource efficiency that directly deals with information, technologies, or materials that

preserves or restores environmental quality. This requires specialised

In the Flash 426 Eurobarometer "SMEs, resource skills, knowledge, training, or experience (e.g. verifying compliance efficiency and green markets" it is shown that 61% of with environmental legislation, monitoring resource efficiency within

the company, promoting and selling green products and services).

Finland 7

relates to the economic environment. The recession and establishing clean technology start-ups and facilitating the problems in the ICT sector have led among other the development of environmental technologies. things to a steep decline in both public and private According to a report from the Finnish Environmental

research and development investments. Government Institute 11 , while there is substantial and increasing

R&D funding decreased by 13% in real terms between demand for eco-innovations, it is often difficult for 2010 and 2014, and gross domestic expenditures for R&D Finnish companies to access international markets. In declined sharply. Another high-level challenge for the particular, start-ups and SMEs face problems in Finnish innovation system is its low level of commercialising their new products and services internationalisation, as well as a relatively fragmented internationally. Networks are missing or limited, and university system. financing might not always readily available. As for the

Figure 2: Eco-Innovation Index 2015 (EU=100) 10 customers, the long-term benefits from eco-friendly products may be difficult to recognise, meaning that

customers are not committed to pay an additional margin for environmentally friendly products. In general, the payback period for eco-innovations is long, and returns on investment uncertain.

The Finnish Innovation Fund (Sitra) 2015 report 12 ‘The

opportunities of a circular economy for Finland’ discusses the economic potential of the circular economy for the country, also mapping out tangible business opportunities. Sitra estimates that circular economy represents an opportunity worth around EUR 1.5-2.5 billion for Finland. Some companies will benefit indirectly from efficient use of material flows while others will be able to sell products and services based on new business models that take advantage of the circular economy. The key sector-specific opportunities discussed in the Sitra report concern paper industry side streams; the opportunities in the food industry to reduce loss of value; business potential of private consumption; and opportunities in construction and manufacture of machinery.

The forestry-wood value chain in Finland has two key areas of interest for the circular economy: recovery of paper fibre for reuse accounts for a major share of total material flow, and most wood waste in Finland ends up as an energy source. From the circular economy perspective, the best opportunities lie in improving the

Despite the problems, Finland still outperforms its peers circulation of paper fibres and the use of side streams. when it comes to highly skilled human resources, public

and business investments in R&D and patent The food value chain, from agriculture to retail and applications. The main high-level driver of eco-innovation restaurant services, also includes two factors crucial to stems from the fact that Finland still ranks among the circular economy: how well the original raw material is world’s best in R&D intensity, and performs well in terms used, and the way in which nutrients are reintroduced of scientific and technological excellence: the Information into the nutrient cycle. Potential high-level actions Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) ranked include the minimisation of food waste generated by Finland first in how its policies contribute to global households and hospitality services, as well as capturing

innovation system. the maximal value of inedible food waste instead of incinerating it. Finland’s food chain is indeed ideally

More specifically to eco-innovation, Finland has several placed to foster the circular economy at the local level. hot-spot clusters in technological areas such as materials,

energy, and agriculture. Finland also ranked second in Sitra also discusses three dimensions of household

the 2014 Cleantech Innovation ranking by WWF, which 11

compared countries based on their conditions for Antikainen, R., 2015, Ekoinnovaatioille nostetta monipuolisista verkostoista, Tekes blog. Available at http://www.tekes.fi/nyt/blogit

2015/ekoinnovaatioille-nostetta-monipuolisistaverkostoista/ 12 http://www.sitra.fi/en/julkaisu/2015/opportunities-circular-economy 10 Eco-innovation Observatory : Eco-Innovation scoreboard 2015 finland-0

Finland 8

consumption that are of interest from the perspective of − Reducing per capita waste generation and waste the circular economy: the opportunities stemming from generation in absolute terms. the sharing economy, second-hand markets and the − Limiting energy recovery to non-recyclable materials recycling of household waste. As for the latter, a major and phasing out landfilling of recyclable or part of material flows in Finland and elsewhere is due to recoverable waste. private consumption, and post-consumer waste is SDG 12 invites countries to substantially reduce waste generally sent to landfills unsorted. According to the generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and Minister of the Environment, recycling in Finland could reuse, by 2030.

be increased, especially in packaging waste and biowaste.

Additional EU measures would also help to speed up The EU's approach to waste management is based on the

progress at the national level. "waste hierarchy" which sets out an order of priority when shaping waste policy and managing waste at the

In addition to Sitra’s detailed report, the circular operational level: prevention, preparing for reuse, economy was also selected as one of the key projects of recycling, recovery and, as the least preferred option, Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s 2015 government disposal (which includes landfilling and incineration programme, with a planned public investment of EUR 40 without energy recovery). The progress towards reaching million. Related initiatives, also supported by Sitra, recycling targets and the adoption of adequate include trial projects that aim to facilitate the building of WMP/WPP 13 should be the key items to measure the concrete business models as well as the sharing of best performance of Member States. This section focuses on practices in the country. The functioning and feasibility management of municipal waste for which EU law sets tests of different business models are currently underway mandatory recycling targets. in the textile industry, nutrient cycling, cities, and

technology and export companies. The amount of municipal waste

14 generated in Finland

remains above the EU average (475 kg/y/inhabitant in Together with new actions from the EU, the funding 2014) but it has decreased from 493 kg/y/inhabitant in

environment and the government’s preparedness to 2013 to 482 kg/y/inhabitant in 2014 15 .

support circular economy in Finland indeed seem

promising. Figure 3 depicts the municipal waste by treatment in Finland in terms of kg per capita, which shows an

As implied earlier, resource efficiency in general is increase of incineration and a decrease in landfilling.

another challenge for Finland, especially due to the high number of resource-intensive industries in the economy.

Several measures to improve resource efficiency have been outlined at the national level, for instance in the working group proposal for a National material efficiency program, prepared in collaboration with the Ministry of

Employment and Economy and the Ministry of the

Environment

Finland has four EMAS registered organisations, which can be compared with EU total registrations of 4,034. It has not seen any changes since October 2015. However, the coverage of these registrations is broad, as they include UPM Kymmene Corporation with its 19 sites in

Europe, China and Uruguay. Organizations operating outside Europe can be registered to EMAS in Finland since 2012.

Concerning the EU Ecolabel, Finland has 14 licenses, compared to the 1,875 total number of licenses in the

EU.

13

Waste management Waste Management Plans/Waste Prevention Programmes 14 Municipal waste is defined as household waste or waste comparable

in its nature to household waste generated by administration,

Turning waste into a resource requires: services, businesses, and industrial activities, and it consists of waste

− Full implementation of Union waste legislation, collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities, or directly by the

which includes the waste hierarchy; the need to private sector (business or private non-profit institutions) not on

ensure separate collection of waste; the landfill behalf of municipalities. 15 Eurostat, Municipal waste and treatment, by type of treatment

diversion targets etc. method, accessed October 2016

Finland 9

Figure 3: Municipal waste by treatment in Finland 2007- the previous couple of years, incineration remains the

14 16 main waste management method and its share

continued to increase (42% in 2013, 50% in 2014).

While the possibility of imposing a tax on waste incineration has been studied several times in Finland,

Landfilling is relatively low (17%) and below the EU the last time in 2014, the studies have not resulted in average (28%). Finland has complied with both the 2006 such a tax. However, issues such as taking into account and the 2009 landfill diversion targets. Finland also the need to treat equally incineration and co-incineration already fulfilled the 35% requirement for the year 2016 in of waste, the relationship to the EU Emissions Trading 2014. System (ETS) and the impacts on exports of municipal

Recycling of municipal waste accounts for 33% waste for incineration to neighbouring EU countries have

(composting accounts for 15%), below the EU average not been covered.

(44%) as shown in Figure 4. The national waste management plan, including the

Figure 4: Recycling rate of municipal waste 2007-14 17 Waste Prevention Programme, sets a 30% recycling target, 6% composting at source, 14% composting an

anaerobic digestion, 30% energy recovery and 20% landfilling by 2016. The National Waste Management Plan 2008-2016 is currently being reviewed. A new landfill ban on placing organic waste at landfills came into force in 2016.

According to a recent study, full implementation of the existing legislation could create more than 4,800 jobs in Finland and increase the annual turnover of the waste sector by over EUR 514 million. Moving towards the targets of the Roadmap on resource efficiency which outlines how we can transform Europe's economy into a sustainable one by 2050 could create over 6,500 additional jobs and increase the annual turnover of the

waste sector by over EUR 690 million 19 .

Suggested action

The recycling rate decreased after 2011 and remained • Introduce new policies, including economic stable between 2013 and 2014, below the targets set out instruments or producer responsibility schemes, to in the EU Waste Framework Directive for the recycling of promote prevention, make reuse and recycling more

municipal waste of 50% by 2020 18 (see Figure 4). Like in economically attractive.

16 Eurostat, Municipal waste and treatment, by type of treatment municipal waste. Finland uses method 2, which means that Finland

method, accessed October 2016 includes all municipal waste streams in the calculations.

17 Eurostat, Recycling rate of municipal waste , accessed October 2016 19 Bio Intelligence service, 2011. Implementing EU Waste legislation for

18 Member States may choose a different method than the one used by Green Growth , study for European Commission. The breakdown per

ESTAT (and referred to in this report) to calculate their recycling rates country on job creation was made by the consultant on Commission and track compliance with the 2020 target of 50% recycling of demand but was not included in the published document.

Finland 10

• Shift reusable and recyclable waste away from incineration, e.g. by introducing an incineration tax.

Finland 11

• 2. 

  Protecting, conserving and enhancing natural capital

Nature and Biodiversity occurring in Finland, the Natura 2000 network in Finland

is considered complete in the Alpine region and almost

The EU Biodiversity Strategy aims to halt the loss of complete in the Boreal and Marine Baltic region.

biodiversity in the EU by 2020, restore ecosystems and

their services in so far as feasible, and step up efforts to However, there are insufficiencies in designation for the marine components of the SCIs network, as shown in

avert global biodiversity loss. The EU Birds and Habitats Figure 5 22 .

Directives aim at achieving favourable conservation

status of protected species and habitats. Figure 5: Sufficiency assessment of SCI networks in

SDG 14 requires countries to conserve and sustainably Finland based on the situation until December 2013 use the oceans, seas and marine resources, while SDG 15 (%)

23

requires countries to protect, restore and promote the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

The 1992 EU Habitats Directive and the 1979 Birds

Directive are the cornerstone of the European legislation aimed at the conservation of the EU's wildlife. Natura

2000, the largest coordinated network of protected areas in the world, is the key instrument to achieve and implement the Directives' objectives to ensure the longterm protection, conservation and survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats and the ecosystems they underpin.

The adequate designation of protected sites as Special

Ares of Conservation (SAC) under the Habitats Directive and as Special Protection Areas (SPA) under the Birds

Directive is a key milestone towards meeting the objectives of the Directives. The results of Habitats

Directive Article 17 and Birds Directive Article 12 reports The process for the designation of the sites as special and the progress towards adequate Sites of Community areas of conservation (SAC) is almost complete.

Importance (SCI)-SPA and SAC designation 20 both in land

and at sea, should be the key items to measure the Finland has developed a new planning and monitoring performance of Member States. system for its protected areas which includes a specific

periodic assessment of the status of the habitats and

As of early 2016, 12.7% of the Finnish national territory is species of the Natura 2000 sites. Management plans are covered by Natura 2000 (EU average 18.1%), with Birds linked to this system. Most of Natura 2000 sites are Directive SPAs covering 7.9% (EU average 12.3%) and managed by one state owned organisation, Habitats Directive SCIs covering 12.5% (EU average Metsähallitus, which develops the use of state-owned 13.8%). There are altogether 1,865 Natura 2000 sites in land and waters.

Finland. The number of nature-related complaints and

Based on an assessment of the sufficiency of the SCI infringements is not very high in Finland. Most

network 21 for Annex II species and Annex I habitats complaints and infringement cases relate to the

20 Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) are designated pursuant to the

Habitats Directive whereas Special Areas of Protection (SPAs) are network in that country. The current data , which were assessed in designated pursuant to the Birds Directive; figures of coverage do 2014-2015, reflect the situation up until December 2013. not add up due to the fact that some SCIs and SPAs overlap. Special 22 The percentages in Figure 5 refer to percentages of the total number Areas of Conservation (SACs) means a SCI designated by the Member of assessments (one assessment covering 1 species or 1 habitat in a States. given biographical region with the Member State); if a habitat type or

21 For each Member State, the Commission assesses whether the a species occurs in more than 1 Biogeographic region within a given species and habitat types on Annexes I and II of the Habitats Member State, there will be as many individual assessments as there Directive are sufficiently represented by the sites designated to date. are Biogeographic regions with an occurrence of that species or

This is expressed as a percentage of species and habitats for which habitat in this Member State.

further areas need to be designated in order to complete the 23 European Commission internal assessment.

Finland 12

derogations under Article 9 (Birds Directive) and 16 The results from the Article 12 report under Birds

(Habitats Directive). Management of the wolf population Directive 28 show that short-term trends of breeding birds

is the main topic in complaints. are improving for 29% of the species and stable and

The Finnish report under Article 17 Habitats Directive 24 decreasing for 27% of species, as depicted in Figure 7. shows that 34% of habitat assessments indicate The same categories for long-term trends are 38%, 16% favourable status 25 (for comparison, 16% at EU27-level) and 34%. Since the 1950s, Europe’s farmland bird and 39% are considered to be Unfavourable –Inadequate populations have decreased by one half. This has also (EU27: 47%) and 26% are Unfavourable – Bad (EU27 is happened in Finland.

30%) as depicted in Figure 6 26 . Agricultural activities are Figure 7: Short-term population trend of breeding and most frequently reported pressures of high importance wintering bird species in Finland in 2012 (%)

29

for habitat types. Concerning species assessments (other than birds) 46% are at favourable status (EU27: 23%),

35% at unfavourable-inadequate (EU27: 42% and 11% unfavourable-bad status (EU27: 18%).

Figure 6: Conservation status of habitats and species in

Finland in 2007/2013 (%) 27

There is a good knowledge of species present on Finnish territory. Of the 45,000 species living in Finland, it has been possible to evaluate the threat status for over 21,000 species. The conclusion is that one in ten of all evaluated species in Finland is endangered.

The latest Red List of Birds (2015) 30 indicates that out of

245 bird species, 36% are Threatened, 9% are Nearly Threatened and 55% are Least Concern. Targeted conservation actions are bringing results, as shown by increasing populations of Golden Eagle, White-tailed Sea Eagle, White-backed Woodpecker and Peregrine Falcon. On the other hand, concerns have been raised recently on the decline of common forest birds in managed forests in Southern Finland. Red list assessment of

24 Article 17 requires a report to be sent to the European Commission mammals (2015) shows that Arctic fox is critically

every 6 years following an agreed format. The core of the ‘Article 17’ endangered and the Saimaa ringed seal, Wolverine, Wolf

report is assessment of conservation status of the habitats and and Natterer's Bat are Endangered. However, the

species targeted by the Habitats Directive. Mountain hare and Otter are no longer Threatened. For

25 Conservation status is assessed using a standard methodology as

being either ‘favourable’, ‘unfavourable-inadequate’ and birds the most important threats are changes in breeding

‘unfavourable-bad’, based on four parameters as defined in Article 1 areas, along migration routes and in wintering areas. For

of the Habitats Directive. mammals the main threats are hunting (including illegal 26 Please note that a direct comparison between 2007 and 2013 data is killing), climate change and random factors linked to

complicated by the fact that Bulgaria and Romania were not covered

by the 2007 reporting cycle, that the ‘unknown’ assessments have small populations.

strongly diminished particularly for species, and that some reported changes are not genuine as they result from improved data / monitoring methods.

27 These figures show the percentage of biogeographical assessments in 28 Article 12 of the Birds Directive requires Member States to report

each category of conservation status for habitats and species (one about the progress made with the implementation of the Birds assessment covering 1 species or 1 habitat in a given biographical Directive

region with the Member State), respectively. The information is 29 Article 12 of the Birds Directive reporting - national summary of

based on Article 17 of the Habitats Directive reporting - n ational Finland

summary of Finland 30 IUCN, Red List

Finland 13

Finland is implementing a large scale LIFE Integrated and the main drivers and future trends affecting their

Project "FRESHABIT" (20 million Euro) aiming to develop provision; suggestions for developing indicators on the new methodology and indicators for assessing the value of ecosystem services; a spatial case study conservation status of freshwater habitats, to improve (including a view on Green infrastructure); policy and the ecological status, management and sustainable use governance issues and other guiding tools; a scoping of freshwater Natura 2000 sites, by tackling the problems assessment on natural capital accounting; and a review the sites face at water catchment level. This is an on the relationship of ecosystem services and green important demonstration project on how to engage economy. different sectors in the implementation of the Water

Framework Directive and the Nature Directives. Suggested action

• Continue support for the mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services, and valuation work and develop natural capital accounting systems.

Green Infrastructure

The EU strategy on green infrastructure 32 promotes the

incorporation of green infrastructure into related plans and programmes to help overcome fragmentation of habitats and preserve or restore ecological connectivity, enhance ecosystem resilience and thereby ensure the continued provision of ecosystem services.

Some 78% of Finland's surface is forest land. However,

only about 9% of the forest area is strictly protected from Green Infrastructure provides ecological, economic and any forestry measures and most of the protected areas social benefits through natural solutions. It helps to are in northern Finland. The country has currently an understand the value of the benefits that nature provides ambitious bioeconomy target which foresees also to human society and to mobilise investments to sustain increasing use of timber. and enhance them.

Suggested action Under the Forest Biodiversity Programme for Southern Finland (METSO), Metsähallitus has restored forests and

• Complete the Natura 2000 designation process for mires in protected areas - nearly 17,400 hectares marine sites and ensure that the necessary between 2008 and 2015 and more than 26,000 hectares conservation measures for the sites maintain/restore before 2008. The restored area covers approximately species and habitats of community interest to a 0.1% of Finland’s surface area.

favourable conservation status across their natural

range. Metsähallitus has a special legal obligation to protect biological diversity on state lands. Besides wood supply,

ecological values in commercially managed forests are

Estimating natural capital secured with environmental management standards.

Valuable habitats are excluded from commercial forestry

The EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 calls on the Member and are linked by ecological corridors and stepping

States to map and asses the state of ecosystems and stones. The ecological network includes various buffer their services in their national territory by 2014, assess zones such as environmentally valuable forests and the economic value of such services, and promote the biodiversity enhancement areas. Recreational and integration of these values into accounting and reporting landscape sites also support the green infrastructure.

systems at EU and national level by 2020.

The Finnish Environment Institute ran a project called

In Finland some work has been carried out on indicators 'Green infra' 33 , exploring the dependence of ecosystem consistent with the framework developed by the MAES services and biodiversity on the green infrastructure. (Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Green infra had objectives to assess how national Services) initiative. The focus is mainly on biophysical policies, including legislation, can be developed to accounts. The 2015 Study on The Economics of protect and enhance green infrastructure and also to

Ecosystem Services for Finland (TEEB Finland) provided

an overview of the most relevant ecosystem services 31

32 European Union, Green Infrastructure — Enhancing Europe’s Natural

Capital, COM/2013/0249 31 Ecosystem services are benefits provided by nature such as food, 33 Finish Environment Institute, Green infra - The dependence of

clean water and pollination on which human society depends. ecosystem services and biodiversity on the green infrastructure

Finland 14

develop a new GIS-based tool to guide decision making (0.41%). It represented 1851 hectares per year 34 and was

on land use and green infrastructure. The GIS-based tool mainly driven by housing, services and recreation. aims to identify the key areas for Green Infrastructure by

comprehensively assessing the prerequisites for provision The annual land take rate (growth of artificial areas) was

of a multitude of ecosystem services. 1.96% over the period 2000-06, below the EU average (2.90%). It represented 1,544 hectares per year and was

TEEB Finland is building on the TEEB Nordic scoping mainly driven by housing, services and recreation .The assessment and it will be implemented in close copercentage of built up land in 2009 was 0.59%, well

operation with a number of on-going national projects, below the EU average (3.23%) 35 .

e.g. developing national ecosystem service indicators

(FESSI) and Green Infrastructure. In Finland, the soil water erosion rate in 2010 was 0.06 tonnes per ha per year, well below EU28 average (2.46

tonnes) 36 .

Soil protection There are still not EU-wide datasets enabling the

provision of benchmark indicators for soil organic matter

The EU Soil Thematic Strategy highlights the need to decline, contaminated sites, pressures on soil biology and ensure a sustainable use of soils. This requires the diffuse pollution.

prevention of further soil degradation and the An updated inventory and assessment of soil protection preservation of its functions, as well as the restoration of policy instruments in Finland and other EU Member degraded soils. The 2011 Road Map for Resource States is being performed by the EU Expert Group on Soil Efficient Europe, part of Europe 2020 Strategy provides Protection.

that by 2020, EU policies take into account their direct

and indirect impact on land use in the EU and globally, Figure 8 shows the different land cover types in Finland and the rate of land take is on track with an aim to in 2012.

achieve no net land take by 2050. Figure 8: Land Cover types in Finland 2012 37

SDG 15 requires countries to combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land-degradation-neutral world by 2030.

Soil is an important resource for life and the economy. It provides key ecosystem services including the provision of food, fibre and biomass for renewable energy, carbon sequestration, water purification and flood regulation, the provision of raw and building material. Soil is a finite and extremely fragile resource. Land taken by urban development and infrastructure is highly unlikely to be reverted to its natural state; it consumes mostly agricultural land and increases fragmentation of habitats.

Soil protection is not subject to a comprehensive and coherent set of rules in the EU. Existing EU policies in areas such as agriculture, water, waste, chemicals, and prevention of industrial pollution however contribute to the protection of soils but the continuous degradation of soil suggests that it is insufficiently protected.

Artificial land cover is used for settlements, production systems and infrastructure. It may itself be split between built-up areas (buildings) and non-built-up areas (such as linear transport networks and associated areas).

The annual land take rate (growth of artificial areas) as 34

provided by CORINE Land Cover was 0.41% in Finland European Environment Agency Draft results of CORINE Land Cover (CLC) inventory 2012; mean annual land take 2006-12 as a % of 2006

over the period 2006-12, equal to the EU average artificial land.

35 European Environment Agency, 2016. Imperviousness and imperviousness change

36 Eurostat, Soil water erosion rate , Figure 2, accessed November 2016 37 European Environment Agency, Land cover 2012 and changes country analysis [publication forthcoming]

Finland 15

identifying what GES is in the first place.

Finland established a monitoring programme of its marine waters in 2014. The monitoring programme is

well-developed and adequate in many areas 42 .

Suggested action

Marine protection • Continue work to improve the definitions of GES in

The EU Coastal and Marine Policy and legislation require particular for biodiversity descriptors, including that by 2020 the impact of pressures on marine waters is through regional cooperation by using the work of the reduced to achieve or maintain good environmental relevant Regional Sea Convention.

status and coastal zones are managed sustainably. • Identify and address knowledge gaps. • Continue to integrate existing monitoring programmes

SDG 14 requires countries to conserve and sustainably required under other EU legislation and to implement use the oceans, seas and marine resources for joint monitoring programmes developed at sustainable development. (sub)regional level, for instance by HELCOM.

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) 38 aims • Continue to enhance comparability and consistency of to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of the EU's monitoring methods within the country's marine marine waters by 2020 by providing an ecosystem region. approach to the management of human activities with • Ensure that the monitoring programme is fully impact on the marine environment. The Directive appropriate to monitor progress towards GES.

requires Member States to develop and implement a marine strategy for their marine waters, and cooperate with Member States sharing the same marine region or subregion.

As part of their marine strategies, Member States had to make an initial assessment of their marine waters,

determine GES 39 and establish environmental targets by

July 2012. They also had to establish monitoring programmes for the on-going assessment of their marine waters by July 2014. The next element of their marine strategy is to establish a Programme of Measures (2016).

Finnish marine protected areas covered 8,153.3 square

kilometers of its marine water in the Baltic Sea 40 .

In its implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework

Directive, Finland addresses GES for all descriptors. It has generally used existing EU requirements and standards and places a strong emphasis on standards and assessments developed in the region though the Regional

Sea Convention for the Baltic Sea, HELCOM. However, the GES definition is generally qualitative and therefore

not yet defined in a way which is measurable 41 .

It is therefore too early to say whether Finnish marine waters are in good status as there were weaknesses in

38 European Union, Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC

39 The MSFD defines Good Environmental Status (GES) in Article 3 as:

“The environmental status of marine waters where these provide ecologically diverse and dynamic oceans and seas which are clean, healthy and productive”

40 2012 Data provided by the European Environmental Agency to the

European Commission – Not published 41 Commission Staff Working Document Accompanying the Commission

Report on "The first phase of implementation of the Marine Strategy 42 . Commission Staff Working Document Accompanying the Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) - The European Commission's Commission Report assessing Member States' monitoring assessment and guidance" ( SWD(21014) 049 final and programmes under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive COM(2014)097 final i) (COM(2017)3 i and SWD(2017)1 final)

Finland 16

• 3. 

  Ensuring citizens' health and quality of life

Air quality applicable national emission ceilings 45 . Conversely, for

The EU Clean Air Policy and legislation require that air ammonia only modest emission reductions have been recorded (-2%), and emissions for this pollutant are still

quality in the Union is significantly improved, moving 15% above current ceilings.

closer to the WHO recommended levels. Air pollution

and its impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity should be At the same time, air quality in Finland continues to give further reduced with the long-term aim of not exceeding cause for concern. For the year 2013, the European

critical loads and levels. This requires strengthening Environment Agency 46 estimated that about 1 730

efforts to reach full compliance with Union air quality premature deaths were attributable to fine particulate

legislation and defining strategic targets and actions matter concentrations 47 , and 80 to ozone beyond 2020. concentrations 48 . Although concentrations above EU air

quality standards such as shown in Figure 9 49 are rare,

The EU has developed a comprehensive suite of air

quality legislation 43 , which establishes health-based significant health risks still exist.

standards and objectives for a number of air pollutants. For 2014, exceedances above the EU air quality standards

Figure 9: Attainment situation for PM10, NO2 and O3 in 2014 in Finland

As part of this, Member States are also required to have been registered related to annual mean ensure that up-to-date information on ambient concentrations of different air pollutants is routinely

made available to the public. In addition, the National 45 The current national emission ceilings apply since 2010 ( Directive

Emission Ceilings Directive provides for emission 2001/81/EC ); revised ceilings for 2020 and 2030 have been set by Directive (EU) 2016/2284 on the reduction of national emissions of

reductions at national level that should be achieved for certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 2003/35/EC i and main pollutants. repealing Directive 2001/81/EC i.

46 European Environment Agency, 2016. Air Quality in Europe – 2016

The emission of several air pollutants has decreased Report (Table 10.2, please see details in this report as regards the

significantly in Finland 44 . Reductions between 1990 and underpinning methodology)

47

2014 for sulphur oxides (-83%), nitrogen oxides (-52%), as Particulate matter (PM) is a mixture of aerosol particles (solid and

well as volatile organic compounds (-70%) ensure air liquid) covering a wide range of sizes and chemical compositions. PM10 (PM2.5) refers to particles with a diameter of 10 (2.5)

emissions for these pollutants are within the currently micrometres or less. PM is emitted from many anthropogenic

sources, including combustion.

48 Low level ozone is produced by photochemical action and it is also a 43 European Commission, 2016. Air Quality Standards greenhouse gas.

44 See EIONET Central Data Repository and Air pollutant emissions data 49 Based on European Environment Agency, 2016. Air Quality in Europe viewer (NEC Directive) – 2016 Report (Figures 4.1, 5.1 and 6.1)

Finland 17

concentration of nitrogen dioxide (NO 50 2 ) in one air Excessive noise is one of the main causes of health quality zone (Helsinki 51 , which was covered by a time issues 56 . To alleviate this, the EU acquis sets out several

extension and will only need to show compliance from requirements, including assessing the exposure to

2015 onwards). Furthermore, target values for annual environmental noise through noise mapping, ensuring mean concentrations have been exceeded for arsenic that information on environmental noise and its effects is

and for benzo(a)pyrene in at least one air quality zone 52 . made available to the public, and adopting action plans

Exceedances on target values for cadmium and nickel with a view to preventing and reducing environmental may also occur in some years. noise where necessary and to preserving the acoustic

It is estimated that the health-related external costs from environment quality where it is good.

air pollution in Finland are above EUR 2 billion/year Finnish authorities have fulfilled all their obligations with

(income adjusted, 2010), which include not only the regards to the Environmental Noise Directive 57 for the

intrinsic value of living a full health life but also direct current reporting period. costs to the economy. These direct economic costs relate to 542 thousand workdays lost each year due to sickness

related to air pollution, with associated costs for Water quality and management

employers of EUR 74 million/year (income adjusted,

2010), for healthcare of above EUR 8 million/year

(income adjusted, 2010), and for agriculture (crop losses) The EU water policy and legislation require that the

of EUR 29 million/year (2010) 53 . impact of pressures on transitional, coastal and fresh waters (including surface and ground waters) is

Suggested action significantly reduced to achieve, maintain or enhance

• Maintain downward emissions trends of air pollutants good status of water bodies, as defined by the Water in order to achieve full compliance with currently Framework Directive; that citizens throughout the Union applicable national emission ceilings and air quality benefit from high standards for safe drinking and bathing limit values - and reduce adverse air pollution impacts water; and that the nutrient cycle (nitrogen and on health, environment and economy. phosphorus) is managed in a more sustainable and • Reduce ammonia (NH resource-efficient way. 3 ) emissions to comply with

currently applicable national emission ceilings 54 , for example by introducing or expanding the use of low SDG 6 encourages countries to ensure availability and emission agricultural techniques. sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.

• Reduce nitrogen oxide (NO x ) emissions to comply with

currently applicable national emission ceilings 55 and/or The main overall objective of EU water policy and to reduce nitrogen dioxide (NO legislation is to ensure access to good quality water in 2 ) (and ozone concentrations), inter alia, by reducing transport sufficient quantity for all Europeans. The EU water related emissions - in particular in urban areas, acquis

58 seeks to ensure good status of all water bodies

especially Helsinki. across Europe by addressing pollution sources (from e.g. agriculture, urban areas and industrial activities), physical

and hydrological modifications to water bodies) and the

Noise management of risks of flooding.

The Environmental Noise Directive provides for a River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) are a common approach for the avoidance, prevention and requirement of the Water Framework Directive and a reduction of harmful effects due to exposure to means of achieving the protection, improvement and environmental noise. sustainable use of the water environment across Europe.

56 WHO/JRC, 2011, Burden of disease from environmental noise, 50 NOx is emitted during fuel combustion e.g. from industrial facilities

Fritschi, L., Brown, A.L., Kim, R., Schwela, D., Kephalopoulos, S. (eds),

and the road transport sector. NOx is a group of gases comprising World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe , Copenhagen, nitrogen monoxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Denmark

51 Pääkaupunkiseutu (HSY-alue*) 57

 The Noise Directive requires Member States to prepare and publish, 52 See The EEA/Eionet Air Quality Portal and the related Central Data

every 5 years, noise maps and noise management action plans for

Repository agglomerations with more than 100,000 inhabitants, and for major

53 These figures are based on the Impact Assessment for the European

roads, railways and airports.

Commission Integrated Clean Air Package (2013) 58 This includes the Bathing Waters Directive (2006/7/EC); the Urban

54 Under the provisions of the revised National Emission Ceilings Waste Water Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC) concerning

Directive, Member States now may apply for emission inventory discharges of municipal and some industrial waste waters; the adjustments. Pending evaluation of any adjustment application, Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC) concerning potable water Member States should keep emissions under close control with a quality; the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) concerning view to further reductions. water resources management; the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC)

55 Ibid. and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC)

Finland 18

This includes surface freshwaters such as lakes and rivers, programme is applying to the whole national territory. groundwater, estuaries and coastal waters up to one Data concerning the 2008-2011 period showed that nautical mile. nitrate concentrations in groundwater and surface

Finland has provided information to the Commission waters did not raise particular concern. However Finland from its second generation of RBMPs. However, as the is one of the countries bordering the Baltic Sea, which is Commission has not yet been able to validate this heavily affected by nutrients pollution. HELCOM information for all Member States, it is not reported estimation of normalized inputs of nitrogen shows, for

here. instance, that Finland increased its nitrogen inputs to the Bothnian Bay 64 . There are also some concerns on the

In its first generation of RBMPs Finland reported the fertilization in forest ecosystems, which might contribute status of 1,602 rivers, 4,275 lakes, 276 coastal and 3,804 to nutrient leaching in the Baltic Sea. groundwater bodies. The areal coverage of the water

bodies is 85% of all Finnish lakes, about 90% of rivers and As regards drinking water, Finland reaches very high

100% of coastal waters. 30% of natural surface water compliance rates of 99-100% for microbiological, bodies achieve a good or high ecological status ecological chemical and indicator parameters laid down in the status 59 (while the status of 53% is unknown) and 35% of Drinking Water Directive

65 .

heavily modified or artificial water bodies 60 achieve a As shown in Figure 10, there has been a modest

good or high ecological potential. 63% of surface water improvement since 2014 in bathing water quality, bodies (37% unknown), 90% of heavily modified and reaching almost EU average. In 2015, in Finland out of artificial water bodies and 92% of groundwater bodies 301 bathing waters, 83.1% were of excellent quality,

achieve good chemical status 61 . 98% of groundwater 9.3% of good quality, and 2.0% of sufficient quality. 2 bodies are in good quantitative status 62 . bathing waters were of poor quality or non-compliant

The main pressure on Finnish waters is diffuse pollution 63 while it was not possible to assess the remaining 15 that affects 20% of surface water bodies. Point sources of bathing waters

66 .

pollution and water flow regulation or morphological Figure 10: Bathing water quality 2012 – 2015 67

alteration affect smaller proportion of water bodies – 5% and 3% respectively. There are significant regional differences, e.g. in the Kokemäenjoki river basin district in the South West of the country 48% of water bodies are affected by diffuse sources of pollution, 18% by point sources and 8% by hydromorphological changes.

There are deficiencies in the Finnish River Basin

Management Plans related to the unknown status of large portions of water bodies. Programmes of Measures are expected to result in improved ecological status of natural surface water bodies by 6% and ecological potential of artificial or heavily modified water bodies by

9%, and almost no improvement in the chemical status of water bodies. A high number of exemptions have been applied.

Finland has recently revised its action programme implementing the Nitrates Directive. The action

Finland demonstrates excellent compliance rates with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive. The

59 Good ecological status is defined in the Water Framework Directive,

in terms of the quality of the biological community, the hydrological estimated investment needs for urban waste water

characteristics and the chemical characteristics. treatment (reported by Finland under Article 17 of the

60 Many European river basins and waters have been altered by human Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive) are of EUR 47

activities, such as land drainage, flood protection and building of dams to create reservoirs.

61 Good chemical status is defined in the Water Framework Directive in 64 Helcom, ( How much is left to reach the HELCOM nutrient reduction

terms of compliance with all the quality standards established for targets set for a clean Baltic Sea?)

chemical substances at European level. 65 Commission's Synthesis Report on the Quality of Drinking Water in 62 For groundwater, a precautionary approach has been taken that the Union examining Member States' reports for the 2011-2013

comprises a prohibition on direct discharges to groundwater, and (to period, foreseen under Article 13(5) of Directive 98/83/EC i; cover indirect discharges) a requirement to monitor groundwater COM(2016)666 i.

bodies. 66 European Environment Agency, 2016. European bathing water quality 63 Diffuse pollution comes from widespread activities with no one in 2015 , p. 26

discrete source. 67 European Environment Agency, State of bathing water , 2016

Finland 19

million 68 . The EU stimulates green cities through awards and

Suggested action funding, such as the EU Green Capital Award aimed at cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants and the EU

• Improve the monitoring system and methods for Green Leaf initiative aimed at cities and towns, with assessment of status to resolve uncertainties about the between 20,000 and 100,000 inhabitants.

status of many water bodies.

• Review the implementation of the Nitrates Directive Of all the applicant cities for the 2017 Green Capital provisions (e.g. measures concerning both organic and Award

72 , Lahti has the most cycle paths with

mineral fertilizers, closed periods, application 3.8m/inhabitant. Lahti has also pioneered a peer review tool for developing their own environmental work

techniques, buffer strips and fertilization on sloping

grounds provisions, appropriate fertilization standards, activities and sustainable development goals; the town

appropriate safeguards for storage on field) , especially has also assisted a number of European cities in their mutual environment and sustainable development peer

in order to reduce nutrient losses to the Baltic Sea.

• Take effective basic and supplementary measures to reviews

73 .

address diffuse pollution from agriculture, mainly phosphates (e.g. measures to prevent soil runoff and sedimentation, proper disposal of manure, integrated pest management).

• Review and improve measures (e.g. removal of redundant flow barriers and the installation of fish passes) to reduce hydromorphological pressure in river basins.

Enhancing the sustainability of cities

The EU Policy on the urban environment encourages cities to implement policies for sustainable urban

planning and design, including innovative approaches for Tampere has included environmental and sustainable urban public transport and mobility, sustainable development criteria in their public procurement. buildings, energy efficiency and urban biodiversity Furthermore, Tampere has an environmental target for conservation. organic and fair-trade products; to date 155 Tampere

SDG11 aims at making cities and human settlements kitchens have joined the "Stairs Create" and other

inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. programmes committed to use organic products on a regular basis 74 .

Europe is a Union of cities and towns; around 75% of the

EU population are living in urban areas 69 . The urban The EcoSairila project aims to create a new growth centre environment poses particular challenges for the for green industry in Mikkeli. The EcoSairila coordination environment and human health, whilst also providing project 2015‐16 is funded by the ERDF. The project will

opportunities and efficiency gains in the use of resources. provide a unique environment to develop and pilot new techniques and concepts for the circular economy and

The Member States, European institutions, cities and eco‐efficient treatment solutions. The planned land use stakeholders have prepared a new Urban Agenda for the in the project will allow for more than 100 hectares of EU (incorporating the Smart Cities initiative) to tackle new industrial area alongside the waste treatment

these issues in a comprehensive way, including their centre 75 . Nearby, the Green Energy Showroom is a

connections with social and economic challenges. At the network of green energy organisations operating in heart of this Urban Agenda will be the development of Lappeenranta, with the aim to provide an opportunity for twelve partnerships on the identified urban challenges, local enterprises to develop and market innovative high‐ including air quality and housing 70 .

The European Commission will launch a new EU Monitoring ('UBaM') tool to be launched in 2017. Best practices emerge and these will be better disseminated via the app featuring

benchmark system in 2017 71 . the UBaM tool, and increasingly via e.g. EUROCITIES, ICLEI, CEMR,

Committee of the Regions, Covenant of Mayors and others. 72 European Commission, Urban Environment Good Practice & 68 European Commission, Eighth Report on the Implementation Status Benchmarking Report European Green Capital Award 2017 , p.11

and the Programmes for Implementation of the Urban Waste Water 73 European Commission, Urban Environment Good Practice &

Directive (COM (2016)105 final) and Commission Staff Working Benchmarking Report European Green Capital Award 2017 , p.57

Document accompanying the report (SWD(2016)45 final ). 74 European Commission, European Green Capital Good Practice Report 69 European Environment Agency, Urban environment 2014 , p.29

70 http://urbanagendaforthe.eu/ 75 European Commission , European Green Leaf 2015, Good Practice

71 The Commission is developing an Urban Benchmarking and Report , p.36

Finland 20

tech solutions in the fields of energy, environmental

technology and sustainable development 76 .

In June 2016 the Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra, the metropolitan region cities, and Ministries founded the

Helsinki Metropolitan Smart & Clean Foundation. Its purpose is to turn the Helsinki Metropolitan Area into an internationally important reference area for ecological and smart solutions. The main fields of action include traffic and movement, construction, energy, waste and water, as well as consumer cleantech.

International agreements

The EU Treaties require that the Union policy on the environment promotes measures at the international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems.

Most environmental problems have a transboundary nature and often a global scope and they can only be addressed effectively through international co-operation.

International environmental agreements concluded by the Union are binding upon the institutions of the Union and on its Member States. This requires the EU and the

Member States to sign, ratify and effectively implement all relevant multilateral environmental agreements

(MEAs) in a timely manner. This will also be an important contribution towards the achievement of the SDGs, which Member States committed to in 2015 and include many commitments contained already in legally binding agreements.

The fact that some Member States did not sign and/or ratify a number of MEAs compromises environmental implementation, including within the Union, as well as the Union’s credibility in related negotiations and international meetings where supporting the participation of third countries to such agreements is an established EU policy objective. In agreements where voting takes place it has a direct impact on the number of votes to be cast by the EU.

Finland has signed and ratified almost all MEAs.

76 European Commission , European Green Leaf 2015, Good Practice

Report , p.15

Finland 21

Part II: Enabling Framework: Implementation Tools

• 4. 

  Market based instruments and investment

Green taxation and environmentally harmful on electricity, resulting in electricity prices twice as high

subsidies for private consumers as for business users (0.15 EUR/kWh versus 0.07 EUR/kWh).

The Circular Economy Action Plan encourages the use of

financial incentives and economic instruments, such as Figure 11: Environmental tax revenues as a share of taxation to ensure that product prices better reflect total revenues from taxes and social contributions environmental costs. The phasing out of environmentally (excluding imputed social contributions) in 2014

harmful subsidies is monitored in the context of the

European Semester and in national reform programmes submitted by Member States.

Taxing pollution and resource use can generate increased revenue and bring important social and environmental benefits.

In 2014, expressed as a percentage of GDP, Finland’s revenue from environmental taxation (2.88%) was above the EU28 average of 2.46%. As shown in Figure 11, in the same year environmental tax revenues accounted for

6.57% of total revenues from taxes and social-security contributions (EU28 average: 6.35%).

A 2016 study 77 shows significant potential for shifting

taxes from labour to environmental taxes in Finland, when compared to rates in other similar countries. Under

a good practice scenario 78 , these taxes could generate an

additional EUR 1.08 billion in 2018, rising to EUR 2.23 billion in 2030 (both in real 2015 terms). This is equivalent to an increase by 0.51% and 0.93% of GDP in

2018 and 2030, respectively.

According to this study, the largest additional source of revenue would come from a waste abstraction tax which could generate EUR 0.64 billion of revenue generated in

2030 (real 2015 terms), equivalent to 0.27% of GDP. The next largest contribution to revenue could come from taxes on transport fuels. This would account for EUR 0.62 billion in 2030 (real 2015 terms), equivalent to 0.26% of

GDP. Green Public Procurement

Regarding environmentally harmful subsidies (EHS), the The EU green public procurement policies encourage petrol/diesel tax differential in Finland has diminished Member States to take further steps to reach the target over time and is compensated by a fixed tax imposed on of applying green procurement criteria to at least 50% of diesel vehicles. Another key EHS relates to energy taxes public tenders.

Green Public Procurement (GPP) is a process whereby 77 Eunomia Research and Consulting, IEEP, Aarhus University, ENT, public authorities seek to procure goods, services and

2016. Study on Assessing the Environmental Fiscal Reform Potential

for the EU28 . N.B. National governments are responsible for setting works with a reduced environmental impact throughout

tax rates within the EU Single Market rules and this report is not their life-cycle when compared to goods, services and

suggesting concrete changes as to the level of environmental works with the same primary function that would

taxation. It merely presents the findings of the 2016 study by otherwise be procured.

Eunomia et al on the potential benefits various environmental taxes

could bring. It is then for the national authorities to assess this study The purchasing power of public procurement equals to

and their concrete impacts in the national context. A first step in this approximately 14% of GDP 79 . A substantial part of this

respect, already done by a number of Member States, is to set up

expert groups to assess these and make specific proposals. money is spent on sectors with high environmental

78 The good practice scenario means benchmarking to a successful

Finland 22

impact such as construction or transport, so GPP can help reinforce the capacity of implementing bodies to deliver to significantly lower the impact of public spending and cost-effective and sustainable investments in these areas. foster sustainable innovative businesses. The

Commission has proposed EU GPP criteria 80 . Making good use of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) 87 is a powerful tool to achieve

A national strategy on Green Public Procurement is the environmental goals and integrate these into other included in the Government Decision on the Promotion policy areas. Other instruments such as the Horizon 2020, of Sustainable Environmental and Energy solutions the LIFE programme and the EFSI 88 may also support

(cleantech solutions) in Public Procurement of 2013 81 . In implementation and spread of best practice.

all government procurements, the goal is a

comprehensive solution, which promotes energy and Figure 12: EU Structural & Investment Funds 2014-2020: environmental goals and utilises cleantech solutions in Budget Finland by theme, EUR billion

89

the most economically advantageous way.

More detailed targets exist for different product areas: food and catering, vehicles and transports, construction,

energy, services, energy related products 82 .

GPP criteria are developed at the national level and there

is guidance 83 and criteria for 16 procurement areas

including food and catering, vehicles and transport, construction, energy services, energy related products, and textiles (workwear). GPP criteria are furthermore under development for furniture, cleaning services,

professional kitchen appliances, and printing services 84 .

According to a 2010 study, between 20% and 30% of

Finnish local authorities included GPP requirements in

between 50% and 100% of their contracts 85 .

According to a 2011 survey, Finnish authorities included at least one of the EU core green criteria in 41% of the

GPP-relevant contracts, and 15% of the contracts The total ESIF funding for Finland for the 2014-2020

included all the relevant EU core green criteria 86 . period is represented in the figure above, of which the

total ERDF funding is EUR 789.1 million. ERDF investments in R&I are 100% targeted to smart

Investments: the contribution of EU funds specialisation of the regions. The selected smart

specialisation areas include among others: cleantech,

European Structural and Investment Funds Regulations bioeconomy, energy efficiency and material efficiency.

provide that Member States promote environment and It is too early to draw conclusions as regards the use and climate objectives in their funding strategies and results of ESIF for the period 2014-2020, as the relevant programmes for economic, social and territorial programmes are still in an early stage of their cohesion, rural development and maritime policy, and implementation.

80 In the Communication “Public procurement for a better environment”

(COM /2008/400) the Commission recommended the creation of a process for setting common GPP criteria. The basic concept of GPP relies on having clear, verifiable, justifiable and ambitious environmental criteria for products and services, based on a life-cycle approach and scientific evidence base.

81 See link at Ministry of Environment, Programme to Promote

Sustainable Consumption and Production

82 European Commission, 2015. Documentation on National GPP Action

Plans 87 ESIF comprises five funds – the European Regional Development 83 Motiva – Focal Point for Sustainable and Innovative Public Funds (ERDF), the Cohesion Fund (CF), the European Social Fund

Procurement (ESF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

84 European Commission, 2015. Documentation on National GPP Action (EAFRD), and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). The

Plans ERDF, the CF and the ESF together form the Cohesion Policy funds.

85 Adelphi et al. 2011. Strategic Use of Public Procurement in Europe , 88 European Investment Bank, 2016 European Fund for Strategic

Study for the European Commission Investments 86 CEPS, 2012. Monitoring the Uptake of GPP in the EU, Study for the 89 European Commission, European Structural and Investment Funds

European Commission Data By Country

Finland 23

• 5. 

  Effective governance and knowledge

  and the governance of the enforcement process. SDG 16 aims at providing access to justice and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all

levels. SDG 17 aims at better implementation, improving Capacity to implement rules

policy coordination and policy coherence, stimulating It is crucial that federal, regional and local science, technology and innovation, establishing administrations have the necessary capacities and skills partnerships and developing measurements of progress. and training to carry out their own tasks and co-operate

Effective governance of EU environmental legislation and and co-ordinate effectively with each other, within a policies requires having an appropriate institutional system of multi-level governance.

framework, policy coherence and coordination, applying In Finland, the Ministry for the Environment is mainly legal and non-legal instruments, engaging with nonresponsible for formulating environmental policy. The governmental stakeholders, and having adequate levels Acts are complemented by Decrees adopted by the

of knowledge and skills 90 . Successful implementation Government or the Ministry. The Ministry for Agriculture

depends, to a large extent, on central, regional and local and Forestry is responsible for the use of natural government fulfilling key legislative and administrative resources, such as hunting, fishing and water use. The tasks, notably adoption of sound implementing current Government has joined these tasks under one legislation, co-ordinated action to meet environmental Minister.

objectives and correct decision-making on matters such

as industrial permits. Beyond fulfilment of these tasks, The Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVI) government must intervene to ensure day-to-day authorise environmental activities based on permits. The compliance by economic operators, utilities and Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the individuals ("compliance assurance"). Civil society also Environment (ELY Centres) are responsible for the has a role to play, including through legal action. To regional implementation and development tasks of the underpin the roles of all actors, it is crucial to collect and central government, including environmental monitoring share knowledge and evidence on the state of the and supervision. Municipalities serve both as permitting environment and on environmental pressures, drivers and supervising authorities on local environmental and impacts. issues.

Equally, effective governance of EU environmental Currently, based on the Strategic Programme of the legislation and policies benefits from a dialogue within Finnish Government, there is a major reform ongoing, Member States and between Member States and the the purpose of which is to harmonise the state regional Commission on whether the current EU environmental administration with county government administration legislation is fit for purpose. Legislation can only be and to rationalise the organisation of public-sector properly implemented when it takes into account administration at state, regional and municipal levels.

experiences at Member State level with putting EU The Åland Province is autonomous and has its own commitments into effect. The Make it Work initiative, a competence in environmental matters, including Member State driven project, established in 2014, legislation and implementation. organizes a discussion on how the clarity, coherence and

structure of EU environmental legislation can be The National Environmental Policy Programme 2005, improved, without lowering existing protection prepared by the Ministry of the Environment in 1995,

standards. was Finland’s first comprehensive environmental planning effort. Since then, several sectoral programmes

for instance on energy and climate, and Finland’s

Effective governance within central, regional Strategy for the Arctic Region, have been adopted.

and local government The Ministry of the Environment's administrative branch

includes the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) and the

Those involved in implementing environment legislation Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland at Union, national, regional and local levels need to be (ARA). SYKE serves as a research institute and a centre for equipped with the knowledge, tools and capacity to environmental expertise. SYKE's research focuses on improve the delivery of benefits from that legislation, changes in the environment, and seeks ways to control

these changes. SYKE acts also as competent authority for

90 The Commission has work ongoing to improve the country-specific several fields (e.g. EMAS, CITES, Basel). Furthermore, it

knowledge about quality and functioning of the administrative has duties under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

systems of Member States. mainly concerning water management.

Finland 24

The Ministry also guides and funds Parks & Wildlife other checks, penalties and environmental liability help

Finland within Metsähallitus, the state enterprise lay the basis for the systems Member States need to administering state-owned land and water areas. have in place to secure compliance with EU

environmental rules.

Public authorities help ensure accountability of dutyholders by monitoring and promoting compliance and by taking credible follow-up action (i.e. enforcement) when breaches occur or liabilities arise. Compliance monitoring can be done both on the initiative of authorities themselves and in response to citizen complaints. It can involve using various kinds of checks, including inspections for permitted activities, surveillance for possible illegal activities, investigations for crimes and audits for systemic weaknesses. Similarly, there is a range of means to promote compliance, including awarenessraising campaigns and use of guidance documents and

The 2013 European Quality of Government Index puts online information tools. Follow-up to breaches and

Finland in second place out of the 28 Member States with liabilities can include administrative action (e.g.

Åland in first place amongst all European Regions 91 . withdrawal of a permit), use of criminal law

95 and action

under liability law (e.g. required remediation after

Compliance with EU legislation is generally ensured in damage from an accident using liability rules) and

Finland. Infringements and complaints are often related contractual law (e.g. measures to require compliance to different aspects of nature protection which with nature conservation contracts). Taken together, all sometimes attract attention from society. Finnish of these interventions represent "compliance assurance" authorities cooperate well with the Commission in order as shown in Figure 13.

to solve issues taken up by the Commission. Finland's

record for timely transposing legislation is good although Figure 13: Environmental compliance assurance

the Åland Province occasionally transposes later than the

Finnish mainland.

Coordination and integration

Impact assessments are important tools to ensure

environmental integration in all government policies 92 .

The Commission issued a guidance document in 2016 93

regarding the setting up of coordinated and/or joint procedures that are simultaneously subject to assessments under the EIA Directive, Habitats Directive,

Water Framework Directive, and the Industrial Emissions

Directive 94 .

Compliance assurance

Best practice has moved towards a risk-based approach

EU law generally and specific provisions on inspections, at strategic and operational levels in which the best mix

of compliance monitoring, promotion and enforcement is

91 Charron N., 2013. European Quality of Government Index (EQI) directed at the most serious problems. Best practice also

92 Article 11 of the TFEU provides that "Environmental protection recognises the need for coordination and cooperation requirements must be integrated into the definition and between different authorities to ensure consistency,

implementation of the Union's policies and activities, in particular

with a view to promoting sustainable development." avoid duplication of work and reduce administrative

93 European Commission, 2016. Commission notice — Commission burden. Active participation in established pan-European

guidance document on streamlining environmental assessments networks of inspectors, police, prosecutors and judges,

conducted under Article 2(3) of the Environmental Impact such as IMPEL 96 , EUFJE 97 , ENPE 98 and EnviCrimeNet 99 , is a

Assessment Directive (Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, as amended by Directive 2014/52 i/EU).

94 European Commission, 2016. Commission notice — Commission 95 European Union, Environmental Crime Directive 2008/99/EC guidance document on streamlining environmental assessments 96 European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of conducted under Article 2(3) of the Environmental Impact Environmental Law.

Assessment Directive (D irective 2011/92/EU of the European 97 European Union Forum of judges for the environment. Parliament and of the Council, as amended by Directive 2014/52 i/EU). 98 The European Network of Prosecutors for the Environment.

Finland 25

valuable tool for sharing experience and good practices. programs for environmental inspectors and police

Currently, there exist a number of sectoral obligations on officers are in place

107 .

inspections and the EU Directive on Environmental Up-to-date information is lacking in relation to the

Liability (ELD) 100 provides a means of ensuring that the following:

"polluter-pays principle" is applied when there are − data-collection arrangements to track the use and accidents and incidents that harm the environment. effectiveness of different compliance assurance There is also publically available information giving interventions 108 ; insights into existing strengths and weaknesses in each − the extent to which risk-based methods are used to Member State. direct compliance assurance at the strategic level

For each Member State, the following were therefore and in relation to critical activities outside of reviewed: use of risk-based compliance assurance; industrial installations, in particular in specific coordination and co-operation between authorities and problem-areas highlighted elsewhere in this Country participation in pan-European networks; and key aspects Report, i.e. the threats to protected habitat types of implementation of the ELD based on the Commission's and species, air pollution and nutrient losses to the recently published implementation report and REFIT Baltic;

evaluation 101 . − how the Finnish authorities ensure a targeted and proportionate response to different types of non

Finland has adopted a range of measures to underpin compliant behaviour 109 . compliance assurance, for example: Finland is active within IMPEL and hosted an IMPEL IRI in

− a comprehensive set of compliance promotion 2013.

measures, including technical assistance, regular For the period between 2007 and 2013, Finland reported dialogue with the regulated community, two cases of environmental damage dealt with under the dissemination of guides on best practices and co Environmental Liability Directive (ELD). The country also financing with business associations of suffered a major accident (i.e. severe negative impact

environmental management studies 102 ; with high costs of restoration) after the reporting period

− the Ministry of the Environment has published a involving leaks of toxic metal-contaminated tailings guide for compliance monitoring in the field of (Talvivaara). Finland has developed a national guidance

environment protection legislation 103 and guidance document on environmental liability. It did not set up a

for compliance monitoring 104 ; mandatory financial security system for liabilities under

− a compliance monitoring data system (VAHTI) has the Directive. A general environmental damage fund 110 , been established which is assessable by all which has been in existence for nearly two decades, may inspectorates and includes, inter alia, permitting provide financial support in case of higher losses, but the documentation of industrial facilities and relevant fund is not directly applicable to environmental damage

inspection reports 105 . Basic tools for digitalized under the ELD (just applicable to bodily injury, property

environmental permitting will be put into operation damage and pure economic loss caused by in turn of the year 2016-2017; environmental damage).

− there is a high degree of specialisation along the

compliance assurance chain, including police officers Suggested action

and prosecutors specialised in combating • Improve transparency on the organisation and

environmental crime and a specialised functioning of compliance assurance and on how

administrative court in Vaasa 106 . Advanced training significant risks are addressed, as outlined above.

• Encourage greater participation of competent 99 EnviCrimeNet . authorities in the activities of ENPE, EUFJE and

100 European Union, Environmental Liability Directive 2004/35/CE . EnviCrimeNet.

101 COM(2016)204 final and COM(2016)121 final of 14.4.2016. This

highlighted the need for better evidence on how the directive is used in practice; for tools to support its implementation, such as guidance, training and ELD registers; and for financial security to be available in 192.

case events or incidents generate remediation costs. 107 OECD, 2009. Ensuring Environmental Compliance: Trends and Good 102 Outcomes of dialogues with duty-holders are recorded in a Practices , p. 111; IMPEL IRI Finland 2013, p. 4.

dedicated compliance monitoring system (VAHTI). National-level 108 Evidence indicates that relevant data collection covers mainly input

negotiations with representatives of specific industrial sectors are and output parameters, with scope to improve how performance is also organised on a regular basis. See OECD, 'Ensuring Environmental measured and reported, see IMPEL IRI Finland 2013, p. 6, 29 and 48; Compliance: Trends and Good Practices', 2009, p. 105-106. OECD, 2009. Ensuring Environmental Compliance: Trends and Good

103 OH 9/2014 Practices , p. 110-111.

104 OH 2/2016 109 OECD, 2009. Environmental Performance Reviews - Finland , p. 162;

105 Finland has indicated that basic tools for digitalized environmental IMPEL IRI Finland 2013, p. 6, 39 and 48. permitting will be put into operation in turn of the year 2016-2017. 110 Environmental Damage Insurance Act (81/1998, “mandatory

106 OECD, 2009. Environmental Performance Reviews - Finland . p. 161, insurance scheme”

Finland 26

• Step up efforts in the implementation of the It is of crucial importance to public authorities, the public

Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) with proactive and business that environmental information is shared in initiatives, in particular by setting up a national register an efficient and effective way. This covers reporting by of ELD incidents (this may be linked to the compliance businesses and public authorities and active monitoring data system of the state supervision dissemination to the public, increasingly through authority, if feasible). It should moreover take further electronic means. steps to ensure an effective system of financial security

for environmental liabilities. The Aarhus Convention

111

, the Access to Environmental

Information Directive 112 and the INSPIRE Directive 113

together create a legal foundation for the sharing of

Public participation and access to justice environmental information between public authorities

and with the public. They also represent the green part of

The Aarhus Convention, related EU legislation on public the ongoing EU e-Government Action Plan 114 . The first participation and environmental impact assessment, and two instruments create obligations to provide the case-law of the Court of Justice require that citizens information to the public, both on request and actively. and their associations should be able to participate in The INSPIRE Directive is a pioneering instrument for decision-making on projects and plans and should enjoy electronic data-sharing of spatial information between effective environmental access to justice. public authorities who can vary in their data-sharing Citizens can more effectively protect the environment if policies, e.g. on whether access to data is for free. The they can rely on the three "pillars" of the Convention on INSPIRE Directive sets up an European geoportal which Access to Information, Public Participation in Decisionindicates the level of shared spatial data in each Member making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters State – i.e. data related to specific locations, such as air ("the Aarhus Convention"). Public participation in the quality monitoring data. Amongst other benefits its administrative decision making process is an important objective is to facilitate the public authorities' reporting element to ensure that the authority takes its decision on obligations. the best possible basis. The Commission intends to For each Member State, the accessibility of examine compliance with mandatory public participation environmental data (based on what the INSPIRE Directive requirements more systematically at a later stage. envisages) as well as data-sharing policies ('open data') Access to justice in environmental matters is a set of have been systematically reviewed.

guarantees that allows citizens and their associations to Finland's performance on the implementation of the challenge acts or omissions of the public administration INSPIRE Directive as enabling framework to actively before a court. It is a tool for decentralised disseminate environmental information to the public implementation of EU environmental law. leaves room for improvement, as in most Member

For each Member State, two crucial elements for States. Finland has indicated in the 3-yearly INSPIRE

effective access to justice have been systematically implementation report 115 that the necessary data-sharing

reviewed: the legal standing for the public, including policies allowing access and use of spatial data by

NGOs and the extent to which prohibitive costs represent national administrations, other Member States' a barrier. administrations and EU institutions without procedural

obstacles are available and implemented. Driven by the

Finnish law has established an effective access to justice Open Programme for making public databases available framework in environmental matters. This legislative to all interested parties, spatial data is largely being framework consists of several legislative acts in the field published as open data.

of the environment including provisions on public

participation in decision-making, on the right to institute Assessments of monitoring reports

116 issued by Finland proceedings, and on the right to appeal. These provisions and the spatial information that Finland has published on

encompass the legal standing of environmental NGOs as the INSPIRE geoportal 117 indicate that not all spatial

well.

111 UNECE, 1998. Convention on Access to Information, Public

Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in

Access to information, knowledge and Environmental Matters 112

evidence European Union, Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information

113 European Union, INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC

The Aarhus Convention and related EU legislation on 114 European Union, EU eGovernment Action Plan 2016-2020 -

access to information and the sharing of spatial data Accelerating the digital transformation of government COM(2016)

require that the public has access to clear information on 179 final 115

the environment, including on how Union environmental European Commission, INSPIRE reports 116 Inspire indicator trends

law is being implemented. 117 Inspire Resources Summary Report

Finland 27

information needed for the evaluation and implementation of EU environmental law has been made available or is accessible. The larger part of this missing spatial information consists of the environmental data required to be made available under the existing reporting and monitoring regulations of EU environmental law.

Suggested action

• Identify and document all spatial data sets required for the implementation of environmental law, and make the data and documentation (metadata) at least accessible 'as is' to other public authorities and the public through the digital services foreseen in the INSPIRE Directive.