The Environment Ministers of the EU27, meeting in Brussels on Monday 20 December, gave a generally favourable reception to the new EU soil strategy, insisting on the relevance of the objectives, but also on the importance of fully respecting the principle of subsidiarity and taking into account national specificities.
The strategy, presented by the European Commission on 17 November, proposes a set of concrete measures to protect and restore degraded land and soils and ensure that by 2050 all soil ecosystems are healthy, including a binding legislative proposal on soil health expected in 2023 (see EUROPE 12856/5).
Slovenian Minister Andrej Vizjak, who chaired the session for the last time, told the ministers that all remarks will feed into future work to ensure the restoration of soil ecosystems by 2050 throughout the EU.
Objectives and funding instruments. Although several delegations indicated that they were analysing the strategy, it was widely considered timely in its objectives because of the alarming state of soils in the EU and the ecosystem services provided by a resource essential to life.
Food and food security, preservation of biodiversity, contribution to climate change adaptation, and mitigation were on everyone’s lips. Contribution to the zero pollution target and the circular economy were also mentioned, notably by Belgium.
The desirability of filling a legal gap by ensuring the same level of protection for soil as for water, the marine environment, and air in the EU was also highlighted.
Many insisted on the need for a clear definition of soils, and some also argued for a clear definition of degraded soils.
The idea of European funding to support Member States was supported. Bulgaria welcomed the European Commission’s plans to publish guidelines on funding opportunities.
Greece has called for a “soil fund” to support innovations in the decontamination of historically polluted soils.
Flexibility. Germany, France, Austria and the Netherlands, which in 2006 formed the blocking minority that led to the withdrawal of a legislative proposal, appeared to be well disposed.
However, in view of the prospect of a future law with binding objectives, all delegations felt that some leeway should be left in identifying the most appropriate measures to achieve the objectives, taking into account meteorological, biogeographical and climatic conditions and best practices.
The French minister, Barbara Pompili, insisted on the need for a “meticulous identification of specificities”.
The Greek and Luxembourg delegations considered that future legislation should take the form of a European directive.
“A framework directive would be best, with a common base and a part adapted to each country, to take into account its specificities”, said Luxembourg’s environment minister, Carole Dieschbourg.
The only country that has open doubts about the appropriateness of legislation is Sweden. “Is a new legal act needed? I don’t know”, its minister said, stressing that land management remains a national competence, except for cross-border issues.
Latvia, for its part, is concerned about potential duplication, given that the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 already provides for new binding legislation for soil restoration.
Environment Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius recalled that the strategy responds to the demands of the EU Council. He thanked the ministers for their support and suggestions.
“We will develop this strategy together, taking into account the diversity of situations. You want to build on best practices and respect subsidiarity. This goes without saying”, he said. And he assured that the legislative proposal will be based on a thorough impact assessment, so that it is well calibrated. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)