EU environment policy: Lessons still not learned 

The EU needs to move beyond short term economic thinking, and take a long hard look at how it views the environment, according to a new report.

The European Environmental Agency’s ‘third state and outlook report 2005’ concludes that unsustainable development is still a major barrier to further environmental improvements.

“Six years on, climate change is already here, progress on energy demand management is slow, we are healthier but exposure to pollutants remains, and we are depleting our natural resources,” said the head of the agency, Jacqueline McGlade.

“Many of our environmental problems are rooted in the way we use our land, the way we trade and the way we consume.”

Presenting the report’s findings in the European Parliament on Tuesday, McGlade said that EU policymakers had not learned from past mistakes.

“Environment policy works, but there is scope for improvement.”

McGlade said that Europe had an obligation to look beyond the 2010 Lisbon goals and beyond its own borders.

“Europe cannot continue down the path of achieving its short term objectives by impacting disproportionately on the rest of the world’s environment. Policymakers must be farsighted and integrated in their thinking”.

The EU, McGlade argues needs to internalise its environmental costs into service and product prices by shifting its tax base from taxing ‘good resources’ such as investment in labour, to taxing ‘bad resources’ such as pollution.

“We also need reform in the way that subsidies are applied to transport, housing energy and agriculture.  We need subsidies encouraging sustainable practices and efficient technologies.”

The report highlights five messages for EU policy makers: that environmental protection and economic growth go had in hand, that prevention works better than cure, that many environmental problems stem from incorrect pricing of what is consumed, that market tools can provide incentives to bring about behavioural changes and that the cost of inaction can be many times the cost of preventative measures.

“It seems that these lessons need to be repeated again and again if we are to avoid problems such as acid rain, the collapse of our fish stocks or the use of asbestos in buildings.”

McGlade highlighted recent Eurobarometer figures which found that over 70 per cent of Europeans believe that environmental policies can be an incentive for innovation and not an obstacle to economic performance. 

“The evidence in the third state and outlook report shows that they are right.”

The report’s publication and findings are unlikely to make welcome bedtime reading material for some EU leaders ahead of a rescheduled competitiveness council meeting on REACH chemicals laws on December 13.

Germany is pushing hard to further water down the controversial legislation, agreed by MEPs in a marathon vote earlier this month.

“As we enter the last stage of [REACH] negotiations I think it is very important that environmental considerations are taken fully into account,” said commission vice-president, Margot Wallström.

Standing in for EU environment chief, Stavros Dimas, Wallström, a former environment commissioner, said the report had a clear political message.

“Despite the progress of the last 30 years, Europe is not yet on a path towards sustainable development. Further substantial action is needed and this will be the challenge of the coming years,” said Wallström.

“In some ways we have picked the low hanging fruit, with the results that the remaining problems, many of which are global in nature are more difficult to solve.”

Wallström said that Commissioner Dimas’ seven thematic environmental strategies would reflect a much more globalised approach to environmental problems.

And the Swedish commissioner warned against any political manoeuvring to delay or water down the proposed strategies.

“The surest way to address many of the issues highlighted in the report will be by ensuring full and intelligent implementation of the policies that have been or are in the process of being adopted.”

“Environmental legislation is too important to allow significant implementation gaps to open up.”

• Previous article
• Next article