Ob objavi predloga ES za Direktivo o spremljanju in odpornosti tal je 38 evropskih nevladnih organizacij, med njimi tudi Alpe Adria Green poslalo 13.07.2023 skupno izjavo v kateri pozivajo Evropski parlament in Svet, naj zagotovita, da zakon vključuje:

• Krepitev krovnega cilja
• Pravno zavezujoči cilji
• Osredotočeno spremljanje biologije tal in uporabnikov zemljišč
• Učinkovito upravljanje z obveznimi načrti
• Preprečevanje onesnaževanja tal in čiščenje
• Zavezujoče določbe o odvzemu zemljišča (območje zemljišča, ki ga “zavzame” infrastruktura)
• Izvajanje načela onesnaževalec plača
• Mobilizacija potrebnih finančnih sredstev

Skupna izjava ob objavi predloga ES za Direktivo o spremljanju in odpornosti tal

Podpisniki te izjave pozdravljamo predlog Evropske komisije za Direktivo o monitoringu in odpornosti tal (Zakon o monitoringu tal). Žal predlog v sedanji obliki ne bo omogočil doseganja zdravih tal v EU. Sprememba imena zakonodaje, ki naj bi se prvotno imenovala „zakon o zdravju tal“, je simbolična zaradi pomanjkanja ambicioznosti in preusmeritve od zdravja tal k pretežno spremljanju tal. S to izjavo želimo izraziti našo podporo tej pobudi, hkrati pa poudarjamo, kako je mogoče predlog EK izboljšati, da bi EU pomagali doseči cilj zdravih tal do leta 2050.

Pomanjkanje namenske zakonodaje EU o tleh je povzročilo zelo delno varstvo tal in močno razdrobljeno upravljanje. Močan zakon o tleh lahko to spremeni. Zdravi talni ekosistemi povezujejo številne naše najpomembnejše izzive, vključno z reševanjem kriz podnebja, biotske raznovrstnosti in onesnaževanja, zagotavljanjem prehranske varnosti in trajnostnega upravljanja z vodo, pa tudi s cikli hranil in ogljika. Ti izzivi so čezmejni in skladen evropski pristop je že dolgo potreben.

Vendar pa predlogu ES za zakon o tleh manjka ambicioznosti in ga je treba znatno izboljšati, da bo vodil do učinkovitih sprememb. V ta namen pozivamo sozakonodajalca, naj upoštevata naslednje elemente za izboljšanje:

1. Okrepiti krovni cilj

Predlagana direktiva določa splošne cilje za vzpostavitev okvira za spremljanje in nenehno izboljševanje zdravja tal z namenom doseganja zdravih tal do leta 2050. Vendar pa brez časovnega načrta, mejnikov, pravno zavezujočih ciljev in obveznih načrtov ostaja nejasno, kako predlog želi doseči ta cilj. Poleg tega cilj sama je zelo šibka. Doseganje zdravih tal do leta 2050 se omenja le kot perspektiva in potencialna posledica ukrepanja.

2. Vključite pravno zavezujoče cilje

Na žalost predlog ne vključuje pravno zavezujočih ciljev. Takšni cilji so potrebna orodja za merjenje napredka in pozivanje držav članic, ki ne izpolnjujejo svojih zavez, na odgovornost. Zaradi tega predlagamo vključitev srednje- in dolgoročnih zavezujočih ciljev, na primer za ponovno vzpostavitev biotske raznovrstnosti tal ali zmanjšanje ostankov pesticidov v tleh.

3. Osredotočite spremljanje tal na biologijo tal in uporabnike zemljišč

V času večkratnih in konvergenčnih kriz spremljanje in ocenjevanje zdravja tal ne bi smelo zagotavljati le splošnih informacij Komisiji, državam članicam in javnosti, ampak bi moralo biti del strategije, ki temelji na biotski raznovrstnosti kmetov in tal za izboljšanje splošnega zdravja tal.

Na žalost predlog vključuje nepopoln seznam deskriptorjev tal. Čeprav je pozitivno, da seznam vključuje deskriptor za merjenje izgube organskega ogljika v tleh, je pomanjkanje ustreznih deskriptorjev biotske raznovrstnosti tal zelo zaskrbljujoče. Priloga I k predlogu bi morala vključevati obvezen in podroben seznam različnih deskriptorjev biotske raznovrstnosti tal in ustreznih meril za zdrava stanja tal.

4. Zagotoviti učinkovito upravljanje

Pozdravljamo določbe o poročanju za države članice, vendar bi se moralo poročanje začeti prej in biti pogostejše.

Pozitivna vključitev sta tudi določbi o obveščanju javnosti in dostopu do pravnega varstva. To je pravi korak k zagotavljanju boljšega uveljavljanja in izvajanja zakonodaje ter spodbujanju okoljske demokracije.

Vendar pa predlog ne vključuje obveznosti držav članic, da pripravijo nacionalne strategije ali načrte za zdravje tal. To je zelo zaskrbljujoče, saj so takšni načrti potrebni za opredelitev obveznosti pristojnih organov in zagotavljanje učinkovitega ukrepanja, sledljivosti in odgovornosti.

5. Preprečite in očistite onesnaženje tal

Pozitivno je, da predlagana direktiva od držav članic zahteva, da identificirajo in raziščejo vsa potencialno onesnažena območja, da obstaja časovni okvir za identifikacijo potencialno onesnaženih območij in da je vključen register onesnaženih območij.

Vendar pa členi o onesnaženih območjih državam članicam omogočajo veliko prožnosti, na primer pri določanju časovnega okvira za preiskavo potencialno onesnaženih območij in za upravljanje onesnaženih območij. Ta stopnja prilagodljivosti v zvezi z lokacijami, ki lahko predstavljajo veliko tveganje za zdravje ljudi in okolje, je zelo zaskrbljujoča.

Poleg tega predlog ne obravnava dovolj pomembnega vprašanja heterogenosti nacionalnih zakonodajnih okvirov za prenovo degradiranih industrijskih območij. Ukrepi za melioracijo zemljišč so pogosto predpogoj za izbiro lokacije operaterjev na vse bolj internacionaliziranem trgu nepremičnin. Vendar pa so pomembne vrzeli, povezane s tlemi, ki jih pušča Direktiva o industrijskih emisijah, s tem predlogom niso dovolj zapolnjeni. To ustvarja prostor za okoljski damping in daje prednost operaterjem, ki vlagajo v države članice z manj strogimi pravili.

Tudi ostanki pesticidov in drugi onesnaževalci, ki izvirajo iz prekomerne namerne uporabe in razpršenega onesnaženja, niso omenjeni v sedanjem predlogu, čeprav je spremljanje teh snovi bistvenega pomena za oceno tveganja distribucije in trendov onesnaženja tal. Predlog mora vsebovati seznam ključnih onesnaževal s pragom, za katerega sta spremljanje in vrednotenje obvezna, ter ustrezna priporočila za prakse trajnostnega upravljanja s tlemi. Preseganje teh pragov bi moralo voditi do konkretnih ukrepov. Tako za razpršeno onesnaženje kot za onesnažena območja bi bilo treba vrednotenje glede na te pragove vključiti v zavezujoče cilje za leta 2030, 2040 in 2050.

6. Vključite zavezujoče določbe o odvzemu zemljišč.

Predlagana direktiva ne vključuje cilja glede odvzema zemljišč – pravno zavezujočega ali nezavezujočega. Jezik članka o odvzemu zemljišč je šibak, njegov cilj pa je zmanjšati območje, na katerega vpliva odvzem zemljišč, “v največji možni meri”. Ni jasno, zakaj cilj „brez neto odvzema zemlje do leta 2050“ ni bil vključen, čeprav ga Evropska komisija ponavlja v 7. okoljskem akcijskem programu do leta 2020, Načrtu za Evropo, gospodarno z viri, in Strategiji EU za tla do leta 2030 .

Poleg vključitve cilja „brez neto odvzema zemljišč“ bi moral predlog zagotoviti uporabo „hierarhije odvzema zemljišč“, navedene v strategiji za tla. To bi dalo prednost ponovni uporabi in recikliranju zemljišč ter kakovostni urbani prsti ter postopoma odpravilo finančne spodbude, ki bi bile v nasprotju s to hierarhijo.

7. Naj onesnaževalci plačajo

Predlagana direktiva ne uvaja konkretnih mehanizmov za zagotovitev uporabe načela onesnaževalec plača, kot je shema razširjene odgovornosti proizvajalca. Zakon o tleh bi moral zagotoviti, da so veliki akterji, katerih dejavnosti degradirajo tla, odgovorni in finančno prispevajo k spremljanju in obnovi zdravja tal.

8. Zbrati potrebna finančna sredstva.

Sklicevanje na prostovoljna potrdila o zdravju tal, za katera ni gospodarsko pomembnega trga, ni izvedljiva pot za mobilizacijo finančnih sredstev, potrebnih za spremembo trenda poslabšanja zdravja tal v Evropi. Namesto vzpostavitve celovitega sistema spremljanja zdravja tal – kar je nujno za tako certificiranje – prek zasebnega sektorja, bi morale Komisija in države članice same razviti tako obsežen sistem spremljanja in ocenjevanja.

To je tudi pogoj, da javnim zavodom omogočimo razvoj na rezultatih temelječih subvencijskih shem. Takšne sheme lahko sinergijsko združujejo naše agronomske (visoka kakovost in količina donosa skupaj s primernim življenjskim standardom v kmetijskih skupnostih) in naše ekološke imperative (zaščita biotske raznovrstnosti in brez motenj v naravnih ciklih).

Za financiranje zaščite in obnove zdravja tal ter trajnostne rabe tal po vsej EU bi morala zakonodaja o tleh zahtevati prihodnjo SKP, ki temelji na rezultatih in je osredotočena na zdravje tal, ter zagotoviti, da se trenutni strateški načrti sistematično osredotočajo na zdravje tal.

Pozivamo Evropski parlament in Svet, da upoštevata te elemente pri pogajanjih o tem zakonu. Predlog Komisije za zakon o spremljanju tal je začetek – zdaj ga je treba izboljšati, da se zagotovi prihodnje zdravje evropskih tal.

Podpisniki izjave:

Joint statement on the publication of the EC proposal for a Directive on Soil Monitoring and Resilience

We, the signatories of this statement, welcome the European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on Soil Monitoring and Resilience (Soil Monitoring Law). Unfortunately, the proposal in its current form will not enable the achievement of healthy soils in the EU. The change of the name of the legislation, which was originally planned to be called ‘Soil Health Law’, is symbolic of its lack of ambition and its shift away from soil health towards largely soil monitoring. With this statement, we would like to express our support for this initiative but also stress how the EC proposal can be improved in order to help the EU achieve the objective of healthy soils by 2050.

The lack of dedicated EU soil legislation has led to very partial protection of soils and highly fragmented governance. A strong Soil Law has the potential to change this. Healthy soil ecosystems connect many of our most important challenges, including tackling the climate, biodiversity and pollution crises, ensuring food security and sustainable water management, as well as nutrient and carbon cycles. These challenges are transboundary and a coherent European approach is long overdue.

However, the EC proposal for the Soil Law lacks ambition and must be significantly improved to lead to effective change. For this, we urge the co-legislators to consider the following elements for improvement:

1.    Strengthen the overarching objective.

The proposed directive sets overarching objectives to put in place a monitoring framework and to continuously improve soil health with the view to achieve healthy soils by 2050. However, without a roadmap, milestones, legally binding targets and mandatory plans, it remains unclear how the proposal aims to achieve this objective. In addition, the objective

itself is very weak. Achieving healthy soils by 2050 is only mentioned as a perspective and a potential consequence of action.

2.    Include legally binding targets.

Unfortunately, the proposal does not include legally binding targets. Such targets are necessary tools to measure progress and hold Member States that fail to meet their commitments accountable. For this reason, we suggest including medium- and long-term binding targets, for example for restoring soil biodiversity or reducing pesticide residues in soil.

3.    Focus soil monitoring on soil biology and land users

In times of multiple and converging crises, monitoring and assessment of soil health should not only provide general information to the Commission, Member States and the public, but should be part of a farmer- and soil biodiversity-based strategy to improve overall soil health.

Unfortunately, the proposal includes an incomplete list of soil descriptors. While it is positive that the list includes a descriptor to measure the loss of soil organic carbon, the lack of adequate soil biodiversity descriptors is very concerning. Annex I of the proposal should include a mandatory and detailed list of different soil biodiversity descriptors and respective criteria for healthy soil condition.

4.    Ensure effective governance

We welcome the reporting provisions for Member States; however reporting should start earlier and be more frequent.

The provisions on information to the public and access to justice are also a positive inclusion. This is a right step towards ensuring better enforcement and implementation of the law and promoting environmental democracy.

However, the proposal does not include an obligation for Member States to draw up national soil health strategies or plans. This is very concerning, as such plans are necessary to define the obligations of competent authorities and ensure effective action, traceability and accountability.

5.    Prevent and clean up soil pollution

It is positive that the proposed directive requires Member States to identify and investigate all potentially contaminated sites, that there is a timeframe for the identification of potentially contaminated sites and that a register of contaminated sites is included.

However, the articles on contaminated sites allow significant flexibility to Member States, for example on setting a timeframe for the investigation of potentially contaminated sites and for the management of contaminated sites. This level of flexibility related to sites that can pose a significant risk to human health and the environment is very concerning.

Furthermore, the proposal does not sufficiently address the important issue of the heterogeneity of national legislative frameworks for brownfield redevelopment. Land reclamation actions are often a prerequisite for operators’ choice of location in an increasingly internationalized real estate market. However, the important soil related gaps

left by the Industrial Emissions Directive are not sufficiently filled through this proposal. This creates room for environmental dumping and favors operators investing in Member States with less stringent rules.

Also, pesticide residues and other contaminants originating from excessive intentional application and diffuse pollution are not mentioned in the current proposal even though monitoring of these substances is essential to assess distribution risks and trends of soil contamination. The proposal should include a list of key pollutants with threshold for which monitoring and evaluation is mandatory and appropriate recommendations for sustainable soil management practices. Exceedance of these thresholds should lead to concrete action. For both diffuse pollution and contaminated sites, evaluation against these thresholds should be included in binding targets for 2030, 2040 and 2050.

6.    Include binding provisions on land take.

The proposed directive does not include a target regarding land take – legally binding or not. The language of the article on land take is weak, aiming at reducing the area affected by land take “to the extent possible”. It is unclear why a ‘no net land take by 2050’ target has not been included, although it is reiterated by the European Commission in the 7th Environment Action Programme to 2020, the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe and the EU Soil Strategy for 2030.

In addition to including a ‘no net land take’ target, the proposal should ensure application of the ‘land take hierarchy’ referred to in the Soil Strategy. This would give priority to reusing and recycling land and to quality urban soil as well as phase out financial incentives that would go against this hierarchy.

7.    Make polluters pay

The proposed Directive does not introduce concrete mechanisms to ensure the application of the Polluter Pays Principle, such as an Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme. The Soil Law should ensure that big players whose activities degrade soil are held accountable and contribute financially to the monitoring and soil health restoration.

8.    Mobilise the necessary financial resources.

Referring to voluntary certificates for soil health, for which there is no economically significant market, is not a viable path for mobilizing the financial resources necessary to reversing the trend of soil health degradation in Europe. Instead of building a comprehensive soil health monitoring system – a necessity for such certification – via the private sector, the Commission and Member States should develop such an extensive monitoring and assessment system themselves.

This is also a condition to enable public institutions to develop result-based subsidy schemes. Such schemes can synergistically combine our agronomic (high quality and quantity of yields along with a fair standard of living in agricultural communities) and our ecological imperatives (protection of biodiversity and no disruption of natural cycles).

In order to finance EU wide protection and restoration of soil health and the sustainable use of soils, the Soil Law should require a result-based and soil health focused future CAP as well as make sure that current Strategic Plans focus systematically on soil health.

ZA PRIHODNOST NAŠIH OTROK!!!

Plačilo Članarine

POSTANITE ČLAN AAG

Spletna platforma za okoljsko pravo EU

PRIJAVA NA SPLETNI ČASOPIS AAG – HRAST