Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2023)728 - Monitoring framework for resilient European forests

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

dossier COM(2023)728 - Monitoring framework for resilient European forests.
source COM(2023)728
date 22-11-2023
Explanatory memorandum

1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

EU forests and other wooded land are increasingly stressed by climate change and unsustainable direct or indirect human use and activity, and related land use changes. Hazards like wildfires, pest outbreaks, droughts, and heatwaves, often reinforcing each other, are likely to lead to more frequent and intense catastrophic events, often beyond national borders. These pressures undermine forest resilience and pose a threat to the capacity of forests to fulfil their various environmental, social and economic functions. Some hazards, for example wildfires, also pose a direct threat to human health and safety. Moreover, they increase the cost of managing forests, including the cost of fighting wildfires.

A comprehensive, high-quality monitoring system that covers all forests and other wooded land in the EU can help to better counter all these pressures and hazards. For example, frequent monitoring of tree cover and its disturbances using earth observation (EO) technologies supplemented with ground observations can reveal patterns of forest vulnerabilities and allow decision-makers to take adaptive measures. If this knowledge is lacking, this also affects the timeliness and quality of forest planning by Member States. Long-term integrated planning is instrumental to keep the wide variety of demands for forest service and resources in balance and ensure disaster resilience according to EU policy objectives and targets for forest services, use and protection.

Current monitoring tools are not fully fit for purpose. Services such as the Copernicus-driven European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) and the Forest High Resolution Layer of the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service have brought about some degree of standardised remote sensing-based monitoring and data in the EU. However, work to harmonise ground-based data, collected mainly through national forest inventories, has been focussing on a few core variables related to timber resources, such as aboveground biomass, growing stock and increment. Even in these cases, there are gaps in terms of timeliness and wider availability of data, leading to uncertainty about its reliability and limitations to its use. There has been no work on harmonising other ground-based data on variables, especially relating to biodiversity, making an EU-wide assessment of the forest ecosystem’s condition difficult. Moreover, the available data on forests has significant gaps, such as for drought, or bark beetle-related forest damage. These gaps hamper effective forest disaster prevention, preparedness, and response by land managers and relevant authorities. Furthermore, several forest parameters such as forest biomass and structure, can only be reliably mapped and monitored across the EU by combining ground observations, remote sensing, and modelling. This combination is complex and challenging, often due to data-sharing and access issues.

The lack of information on the condition and development of forests in relation to disturbances or ecosystem dynamics makes it difficult for policymakers and forest managers to see trends and detect damages or degradation at an early stage and act on them effectively. This impedes the ability of forests to continuously provide ecosystem services, goods and functions to society, including climate change mitigation in which forests play a key role.

Overall, information about the status of forests in the EU, their ecological, social and economic value, the pressures they face and ecosystem services they provide, is fragmented and patchy, largely heterogeneous and inconsistent, with data gaps and overlaps, and data is provided with significant delay and often only on a voluntary basis. Although there are existing reporting processes that gather data and information on forests and their development such as EUROSTAT’s European Forest Accounts, Forest Europe’s reports State of Europe’s Forests or FAO’s Global Forest Resources Assessments, the EU lacks a common system for the consistent collection and sharing of accurate and comparable forest data.

The fast developments in monitoring tools and technologies, used for EO through satellite or aerial means (including drones) and in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) services such as GALILEO, provide a unique opportunity to modernise, digitalise and standardise the monitoring of forests as a service to all forest users and authorities. This can benefit voluntary integrated long-term planning by Member States and stimulate market growth in these technologies and related new skills, including for SMEs in the EU. Data protection and ownership needs to be respected.

Against this background, this proposal aims to: (i) ensure coherent high-quality monitoring that makes it possible to track progress towards achieving EU targets, policy objectives and targets that concern forests including on biodiversity, climate and crisis response; (ii) improve risk assessment and preparedness; and (iii) support evidence-based decision-making by land managers and public authorities, promote research and innovation.

In the last few years, the EU institutions and Member State experts – in the relevant expert groups including the sub-group of the Standing Forestry Committee – have repeatedly and clearly mentioned the need for strengthening EU forest monitoring. The new EU forest strategy for 2030, consequently, announced a dedicated legislative proposal on EU forest observation, reporting and data collection that would also cover strategic plans for forests and the forest-based sector prepared by the responsible national authorities.

Some Member States’ current instruments do not cater for an integrated approach in response to forests as multifunctional ecosystems as they often only address forests from specific policy perspectives: for example, national energy and climate plans and long-term strategies cover carbon sequestration, renewable energy, and energy efficiency, and national and regional climate adaptation strategies cover climate adaptation needs, but they do not necessarily consider other aspects, such as biodiversity or resilience.

Most national planning instruments in the EU do not go beyond a 10-year forest planning cycle. Consequently, they do not take account of long-term climate change impacts for example on species distribution or frequency and intensity of extreme events. Furthermore, they often do not follow an adaptive approach which means that they are not able to reflect policy developments for forests and forestry at EU and national level, that would require a structured response at strategic and prospective levels.

Forest-related EU policies take a long-term view and require strategic foresight, based on timely and accurate information. For instance, the core goals of making the EU climate-neutral (EU Climate Law and Regulation on land use, land use change and forestry - LULUCF Regulation) and climate-resilient (EU Adaptation Strategy), or to maintain and restore European ecosystems (proposed EU nature restoration law) are to be reached by 2050. Many climate change projections cover the period until the end of this century, including studies on how forests will react to, and will be impacted by, accelerating climate change.

Furthermore, the strong diversity of national planning approaches, or the lack of planning altogether, hampers a rapid, coherent and efficient disaster risk response, particularly for threats with a cross-border dimension such as plant pests or wildfires.

Against this background, the proposal further aims to support Member States in voluntary integrated long-term planning to strengthen the consistent implementation of the various sector-based policy objectives and targets to secure forest resilience in a changing climate.

• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

The proposal aims to support the coherent and effective implementation of existing EU policies affecting forests directly or indirectly in the areas of environment and biodiversity, climate, disaster and risk reduction, energy, and bioeconomy.

Contents

1.

Specifically, the proposal will support the policy instruments below:


• The new EU forest strategy for 2030, by providing the knowledge base for an integrated approach to forests as multifunctional ecosystems and monitoring delivery of its targets and objectives.

• The biodiversity strategy for 2030, by specifying indicators to monitor the delivery of: (i) its ambition to increase the quantity and quality of forests, and their resilience against disasters such as fires, droughts, pests, and diseases likely to increase with climate change; (ii) its targets on strictly protecting the remaining primary and old-growth forests; and (iii) on further development of the Forest Information System for Europe.

• The LULUCF Regulation, by improving monitoring of indicators, which will facilitate the reporting of geographically explicit data regarding forest land.

• The Deforestation Regulation, by specifying indicators relevant for deforestation and forest degradation that make it possible to track progress against the non-degradation objective.

• The bioeconomy strategy, by improving coverage and monitoring of indicators that track progress towards sustainability in the EU and its Member States and feed into the monitoring system of the Joint research Centre’s Knowledge Centre for Bioeconomy.

• The Renewable Energy Directive, by strengthening the evidence base in relation to sustainability criteria for sourcing biomass to produce energy, and in particular by requiring that Member States have information on the location of primary and old-growth forests

• the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) and the recently adopted EU disaster resilience goals by improving forest data availability. This will help improve early warning tools for wildfires and other disasters, develop more accurate risk assessments, and increase the overall preparedness to deal with future disasters.

• The digital agenda for Europe and the drone strategy 2.0, by promoting the use of remote-sensing technologies in forest monitoring.

• The Regulation on protective measures against pests of plants by strengthening the evidence base on pest dynamics.

• Consistency with other EU policies

The European Green Deal called for action to improve the quantity and quality of the forested area in the EU and to further increase the resilience of forests. It aims to reach climate neutrality, set a higher biodiversity ambition, ensure a healthy environment, improve human health and well-being, and promote a sustainable and circular bioeconomy. Monitoring the status and trends of forest and ecosystems and multifunctionality that supports voluntary integrated long-term planning by Member States will be key to doing this effectively.

The proposal is designed to ensure synergies with other policies including with their rules on data collection, monitoring and planning relevant to forests. This includes the Air, Water and Nature Directives as well as the Commission proposals on the nature restoration law and on amending the European environmental economic accounts. The proposal will also support climate policy, by making it possible to monitor progress on climate adaptation and mitigation and enabling the uptake of carbon farming schemes under the proposed carbon removal certification framework. The proposal is also fully in line with the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, in particular Proposal 2, which explicitly endorses efforts towards ‘reforestation, afforestation, including forests lost by fire and enforcement of responsible forest management’.


The proposal can also help the EU to demonstrate global leadership and spur the international community into evidence-based targeted action to strengthen forest resilience in a changing climate and improve the sustainable management of forests as multifunctional ecosystems. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework includes a dedicated target on accessible high-quality data, information and knowledge for integrated and participatory management of biodiversity.

2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

• Legal basis

The proposal is based on Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which gives the EU the right to act to achieve objectives of its policy on the environment. The objectives of the EU policy on the environment as set out in Article 191(1) of the TFEU are preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment; protecting human health; prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources; and promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, in particular combating climate change. The EU policy on the environment must aim at a high level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the EU. It must be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay.

The same legal basis underpins EU measures to protect the natural heritage of forest ecosystems. A forest monitoring framework will provide the data that will make it possible to monitor the European Green Deal targets related to forests, and to develop policies to preserve forest ecosystems. Environment is an area of shared competence between the EU and the Member States, so EU action must adhere to the subsidiarity principle.

• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

Action at EU level is justified because of the scale and transboundary nature of forest-dependent markets and the growing risks and uncertainty connected to climate change which require monitoring of the effects of EU policies and legislation, and evaluate with greater precision and timeliness the need for policy changes with a view to achieving policy targets.

This concerns in particular, disturbances such as bark beetle outbreaks, wildfires or windstorms, all with a significant cross-border dimension. These disturbances are increasing in frequency and intensity with climate change, which result in higher prevention and suppression costs as well as increasing greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and market distortions. Considering bark beetle for example, the early detection of bark beetle hotspots is essential to reduce the extent of salvage logging and related costs and loss of income. When occurring at large scale, salvage logging is liable to disrupt the timber market, with a particularly negative effect on SMEs that are heavily dependent on the timber price. Pheromone traps and other ground monitoring in combination with EO providing high quality data, facilitate timely policy intervention and can therefore play an effective and efficient role in reducing costs. As another example, understanding the type of forest and fuel existing in specific areas will be important for forest fire prevention measures and make operations under the UCPM more effective, as European wildfire early warning systems will be improved.

Forest monitoring is currently patchy and fragmented, which prevents the EU from acting in a timely manner against stressors and threats (with a cross-border dimension), as advocated by the new EU forest strategy and from making the most out of cost-effective technological developments and digital innovation, particularly in relation to EO. This situation has arisen from the fact that Member States have been acting alone in an uncoordinated manner over many years. While forest ecosystems often stretch across boundaries, forests are often seen as sovereign entities, and no consistent, transnational data-gathering approach has been fully developed so far. Healthy and resilient forests are of common interest and Member States are unlikely to resolve this fragmented situation without EU intervention.

As regards planning, several Member States have planning instruments in place, but sectoral policies are not covered sufficiently, which might affect the coherence of policy-making, at both Member State and EU level. Member States would be able to make use of the coordinated governance system to ensure consistent timelines for sector-based forest policy objectives and make sure that common information is included.

• Proportionality

The combination of aspects selected in the proposal is proportionate because it is limited to those aspects that Member States need to implement to satisfactorily achieve the objectives of the proposed regulation. To this end, Member States are only required to collect forest data that is linked to EU legislation and policy objectives. Moreover, the proposed regulation will be based on sharing of harmonised data from existing national data collection systems, mainly national forest inventories (NFIs). This will minimise the extent to which Member States will have to adapt their data acquisition methods. To ensure low adjustment costs, the descriptions of the forest data have been selected based on existing harmonisation work done by NFIs. The proposal also aims to work with existing reported data where this meets the requirements, avoiding duplication of reporting obligations. Voluntary long-term integrated planning by Member States is encouraged based on existing efforts respectively.

Because of the scale of the issue at stake and its cross-border dimensions, the EU is the only body that can ensure a consistent monitoring framework and encourage voluntary long-term integrated planning bringing together the Member States. Common standards for data collection and monitoring and minimum common elements for planning cannot be developed at a Member State level.

No option would involve transferring powers from Member States to the EU beyond the necessary monitoring harmonisation and standardisation (no transfer of powers over the operational choices related to forest management).

• Choice of the instrument

A legislative rather than a non-legislative approach fits the subject matter of this initiative and its level of precision. The objectives of this proposal are best pursued through a regulation. This will ensure direct and uniform applicability of the provisions in the EU at the same time and hence it will serve the purposes of harmonisation and provision of timely data. A regulation will make it possible to set common standards that are binding and directly applicable in all Member States without the administrative burden and the delay caused by the need to transpose the instrument into national law.

3. RESULTS OF EX POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

• Ex-post evaluations / fitness checks of existing legislation

Not applicable as this is a new legislative initiative.

• Stakeholder consultations

In line with the better regulation guidelines, this regulation and the accompanying impact assessment have been underpinned by an extensive consultation process. The Commission collected the views of a wide range of stakeholders, in particular representatives of Member States, environmental organisations, research institutes, forest associations, and business representatives. Consultations were carried out as part of an open public consultation, in three expert workshops and in meetings with stakeholders and Member States. A dedicated sub-working group under the Standing Forestry Committee (SFC) met four times and two workshops organised by the Czech and Swedish Presidencies provided further insights. The different views provided valuable information and insights that helped prepare the impact assessment and the proposal.

Call for evidence

The call for evidence ran from 8 April to 6 May 2022. There were 116 responses from 21 countries, mainly from the general public, NGOs, public authorities, business associations, trade organisations and environmental organisations in decreasing order.

Most submissions supported the initiative for an EU framework on forest monitoring and strategic plans across different stakeholder groups, except for the general public, with less than half showing support. The primary concern expressed was that increased centralisation by this initiative should not make existing national forest monitoring unnecessarily burdensome, and that new legislation should not disrupt current management practices of forest owners. The Commission took this opinion into account in the impact assessment and when designing the proposal.

Public consultation

The Commission ran an open public consultation from 25 August to 17 November 2022 and received 314 viable contributions.

The consultation collected views on the need for forest monitoring, related technology choices, and preferred policy and financing options as well as the added value of strategic plans for forests. The results clearly confirmed the need for EU-wide harmonised and timely information on various forest aspects such as health, disturbance, and climate change. Monitoring systems should rely on field data in combination with remote-sensing technologies. Most respondents considered integrating data from Member State monitoring systems as the best policy option, while a single EU monitoring system was equally supported and rejected. Such system should be financed through a combination of Member State, private and EU resources. Around half of the respondents considered that a holistic view, overall coordination and comparability and exchange with other Member States add value to long-term planning. Only an insignificant number of respondents could not see any added value.

Expert workshops

The Commission organised three workshops with technical experts in October-November 2022 on: 1) “Strategic plans for forests”; 2) “Present and future possibilities of Earth Observation for operational forest monitoring”; and 3) “Benefits and costs of forest monitoring”. The workshops generated valuable input to the impact assessment.

Standing Forestry Committee’s sub-working group

Four meetings with Member State representatives took place between November 2022 and May 2023 for technical discussion on policy options. Views were collected in particular on indicator coverage, the use of EO and possible key aspects of integrated long-term planning. Discussions were guided by the results of the open public consultation and the draft impact assessment, and framed by pre-defined questions shared with the group members ahead of the meetings. The sub-group then adopted a report on the upcoming initiative.

• Collection and use of expertise

The proposal is based on the latest scientific evidence. The impact assessment accompanying this proposal is underpinned by a support study prepared by a team of external experts published on the […]. The team of experts worked in close consultation with the Commission throughout the different phases of the study. The meetings of the sub-working group were opportunities for Member States to exchange views on key aspects of the initiative including a preliminary list of forest indicators, the results of the open public consultation and long-term integrated planning. These inputs were taken into account when drafting the impact assessment and this proposed regulation.

The Commission also used many other sources of information to prepare this proposal, in particular the results of EU research and innovation projects and recognised international reports.

The European Environment Agency provided specific expertise and were closely involved in developing the proposal and its impact assessment.

• Impact assessment

The proposal is based on an impact assessment. The impact assessment received a positive opinion with reservations by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) on 17 February 20231. Main points by the RSB included the question of the added value of the initiative notably regarding long-term forest planning and presentation of different options for the level of EU intervention respectively (EU forests – new EU Framework for Forest Monitoring and Strategic Plans (europa.eu)). In response to the opinion, the added value of the proposal was clarified and a hybrid option combining mandatory monitoring and data collection with voluntary planning was developed in the impact assessment.

The impact assessment considered five policy options of which two were discarded early on because they were highly unlikely to achieve the desired results. The policy options below were fully assessed.

Fully voluntary option: this option would aim to achieve a common voluntary approach to forest monitoring and integrated planning to ensure coherent delivery of EU objectives and priorities related to forests while leaving maximum flexibility to Member States as how to translate them into their national context.

The Commission would issue voluntary guidelines to strengthen consistency and comparability in data collection, promote EO and facilitate the drafting of evidence-based integrated forest planning for example by offering a common set of basic requirements and core elements for consideration by Member States.

An expert group would support the Commission in the preparation of voluntary guidelines and facilitate coordination and good practice exchange to promote harmonised national data collection and strengthen forest planning frameworks and mechanisms.

The Commission would continue to provide existing EO services through the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service on selected forest data such as phenology and net primary productivity.

Legislative option: this option would aim to set up an obligatory EU framework covering: (i) the set-up of a forest monitoring system for geo-localisation of forest areas; (ii) data collection and sharing, including advanced use of EO; and (iii) integrated forest planning. This option has two sub-options related to the level of EU intervention in coverage of forest data, the use of EO systems, and the design and development of strategic planning at Member State level.

Common to both sub-options, mandatory forest data would be divided into two groups as set out below.

- Standardised data, for which the Commission takes the lead and provides unified data sharing across the EU. This data would be primarily collected via EO (e.g., Copernicus) and is subject to technical protocols such as those already supervised by the Directorate-General for Defence Industry and Space and the Joint Research Centre.

- Harmonised data, to which Member States would contribute with their own collected data, using their own surveys such as NFIs based on ground observation, but using EO tools where available and applicable. While Member States would need to provide harmonised data to the Commission in accordance with the common reference descriptions, they would not be obliged to standardise their data collection methods (for example sampling approaches and measurement methods), but only to make accessible the data in a harmonised way, if data accuracy requirements are fulfilled. This means Member States could continue using their existing data collection systems – where available – without major changes to the tools currently applied.

For the mandatory forest data, descriptions and methods would be harmonised based either on existing descriptions and methods or those developed with the support of an expert group (see further down). Standardisation would be suggested for forest data where the uncertainty of harmonised estimates is too high.

The second sub-option envisages the inclusion in the forest monitoring system of additional forest data extending beyond existing EU and international monitoring and reporting systems. It would include the issuance of Commission recommendations on the integrated long-term plans developed by the Member States.

Hybrid option: this option would combine core aspects of the voluntary and legislative options described above. Monitoring aspects would be mandatory to address the problem of the varying level of data coverage and the varying approaches to data collection across Member States (as in the second sub-option of the legislative option). Integrated forest planning would be optional for Member States (as in the fully voluntary option).

A full legislative approach was assessed as the most effective, efficient and coherent policy option. Setting up a common framework using a simple, single instrument would address the need for promoting a holistic and integrated approach to forests, following the narrative of the new EU forest strategy for 2030.

The preferred option entails a combination of aspects from both sub-options related to the level of EU intervention. Monitoring and sharing of forest data would be mandatory based on common harmonised or standardised descriptions and methods for a set of forest data covering all priority policy areas, including forest health resilience and biodiversity. This is essential to meet the strategic objectives for data comparability, quality, and availability.

Collection and sharing of forest data would follow a stepwise approach taking account of the operability in terms of availability of common descriptions and methods, availability of EO based tools and methods, and status of monitoring and data sharing in the Member States.

The Forest Information System for Europe would be strengthened as an existing one- stop-shop. This would increase transparency and facilitate access to forest information for stakeholders. It would support building an integrated understanding on forests, their status and diverse ecosystem services.

Recognising the varying use of EO across Member States, the first set of forest data under the forest monitoring system would be monitored at EU level using strengthened Copernicus possibilities, leaving the opportunity to Member States to opt out and contribute to the operation of the system with their data sets. This would strike a balance between stakeholder views expressed in the open public consultation and the need to ensure high-quality data and enable cost savings.

Mandatory long-term plans covering a common set of basic aspects in combination with the Commission issuing recommendations on their development would help Member States set further context-specific priorities, targets and measures in a way that can easily be shared at EU level, while ensuring integrated alignment with EU policies on forest conservation and uses.

The expert group that is being set-up as part of the new EU forest governance created in line with the forest strategy [proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council XX amending Council Decision 89/367/EEC setting up a Standing Forestry Committee] will, inter alia, provide the framework for the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States and will support the Commission in developing common descriptions and protocols for forest data and data collection. This Expert Group should also be open to the participation of experts from Accession Countries.

The proposed combination of increased standardisation and improved harmonisation of forest data would enable a very strong EU-wide single market for SMEs active in this sector. It also builds directly on operational products currently maintained by the Directorate-General for Defence Industry and Space. These products provide a solid platform for developing the specific forest monitoring layers in this proposal. Furthermore, the proposed combination would provide a clear regulatory context for and already build on the experience of the Commission (Joint Research Centre) and the European Environment Agency of refining and harmonising existing map layers such as already produced under the Copernicus programme.

The digital geographical data market is a dynamic but – with respect to forests – a fragmented and highly technical market. The preferred option would provide a means for remote sensing companies, survey operators and data processing specialists to standardise and regularise products for nearly half the EU land area. By doing so, it would also facilitate innovation in advanced digital tools in the sector, for example in better performing digital tools to identify EU-wide indicators needed for climate and biodiversity policy (e.g. carbon removals and certification of action in forests).

The proposal based on the preferred option links strongly to key existing legislation such as the LULUCF Regulation, the Deforestation Regulation and the Renewable Energy Directive as well as to proposals under negotiation (carbon removal certification, nature restoration law, new environmental economic account modules). It thus harnesses the synergies of a common monitoring system that ensures interoperability between the monitoring requirements under the different legislative frameworks without increasing the regulatory burden on Member States.

The forest monitoring to be established under the proposal would lead to a cost-efficient system based on the economies of scales, where EU-wide forest data products can be produced in accordance with standardised definitions and technical specifications, foregoing the need to develop them individually on national levels. This will consequently enable more effective implementation of the abovementioned legislation. For example, extrapolated results from a case study on replacing a single indicator (ground-based mapping of clear-cuts) with Copernicus satellite-data shows potential cumulative benefits of between EUR 28 million to 38 million by 2035 across all Member States.

Where national monitoring systems are already in place, the proposal would not require significant changes to their functioning with regard to data collection methods but rather leave large room for flexibility, requiring only that Member States harmonise the estimated aggregated values in line with common definitions. This will lead to improving the cost-efficiency of the system and reducing the administrative burden on the national administration.

2.

This effective and cost-efficient forest monitoring system would serve multiple purposes:


3.

- improving data for policy making and policy implementation, including by providing more up-to-date information on natural disturbances and forest disasters across Member States; and


- enabling individual forest managers to market their ecosystem services, such as carbon removals, based on comparable and credible data.

Most benefits of the initiative are indirect including the lower administrative burden on businesses, forest managers, administrations and the general public in search of forest-related information, in line with the digital agenda for Europe. Public accessibility to reliable and trustworthy data may also facilitate the use of forest data by the scientific community, policymakers, forest industries, and lead to the development of new data-based services by innovative SMEs.

Timely and accurate information on carbon stocks and fluxes in their forest may give the possibility to forest managers to better identify where the potential of additional carbon removals for the purposes of their certification and plan appropriate sustainable management practices in the most efficient way. The economic value of the EU forest area’s net carbon sink can be estimated at EU32.8 billion. EU forests and wood products currently remove approximately 380 Mt of CO2 equivalent per year. The existence of an EU-wide framework for timely EO and long-term planning would improve early and rapid detection of forest disturbances and adaptation of forests and the forest-based sector to the changing climate. By 2100, the impact of temperature increases on 32 tree species in Europe is expected to reduce the value of European forest land by 27% due to a predicted decline in economically valuable species. Strategic and informed action today would reduce this decline tomorrow, helping the EU to reach its climate neutrality target by 2050 as set out in the European Climate Law.

Regarding costs of the preferred option, these are expected to be borne by Member States and the European Union while SMEs will be largely unaffected. Most of the costs for the Member States would relate to the need to carry out a regular systematized collection of ground data in a network of monitoring sites. This is currently work undertaken by national forest inventories in most Member States. If a Member State has to create a national forest inventory, associated costs are estimated at EUR 42/km2 of forest area (based on the costs three Member States incurred in creating national forest inventories – 5-year interval and use of EO included). The cost of harmonisation of forest data has been estimated at EUR 10 000 per indicator. Adding a new indicator to an already established forest inventory is not likely to entail significant additional costs. However, for a few indicators selected under the preferred option such as mapping of primary and old-growth forests or of forest habitats under Habitats Directive, field surveys additional to the forest inventory might be necessary, entailing some further costs to Member States with large forest areas.

Costs for preparing and communicating an integrated long-term plan are estimated at EUR 600 000 (based on costs incurred by Germany in relation to its 2050 forest strategy).

Considering that better knowledge and better planning will lead to better forest management decisions and policymaking, the proposal will contribute indirectly to the delivery of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including on Health (SDG 3), Water (SDG 6), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12), Climate Action (SDG 13) and Life on Land (SDG 15). With regards to Affordable and Clean Energy (SDG 7) positive effects and potential trade-offs can be expected. Better knowledge and planning facilitating more sustainable management can lead to greater or more long-term provision of woody biomass for renewable energy but risks overharvesting. A similar effect is assumed for Decent Work and Economic Growth (SDG 8) with better knowledge and planning supporting new bioeconomic activities and employment opportunities but leading to a decline in traditional sectors.

Supporting more targeted and evidence-based measures by policy- and decision-makers, including forest managers, the preferred option would strengthen the sustainable provision of economic, social and cultural forest resources and services. For example, timber provision was estimated at around EUR 16 billion in 2021 and the value of regulatory and cultural ecosystem services (i.e. flood control, water purification and recreation - forests held the largest share in the total value of nature-based recreation) was estimated at about EUR 57 billion.

Conclusions

The proposal corresponds to the preferred option in the impact assessment as regards all aspects mentioned above, with the exception of integrated long-term planning. Based on the consultation with Member States, the Commission decided to limit the level of intervention to voluntary integrated planning. This will have an impact on both the associated costs and the benefits of the proposal in comparison with the preferred option. In the absence of an obligation to develop or update integrated long-term plans administrative costs for Member States will not necessarily arise. However, Member States who decide to opt for the integrated long-term forest plans will benefit from strengthened climate adaptation of forests, improved policy coherence and efficiency, and avoidance of trade-offs and conflicts.

• Regulatory fitness and simplification

In line with the Commission’s commitment to better regulation, the proposal has been prepared inclusively, based on transparency and continuous engagement with stakeholders. In line with the ‘one in, one out’ approach, the administrative impact has been analysed. The administrative costs will be mainly for the EU and public administrations in Member States. Administrative costs to businesses including forest owners and people are estimated to be insignificant since the initiative does not introduce new direct administrative requirements applicable to these groups.

Public authorities in the Member States will incur administrative costs in ensuring that their monitoring systems meet the minimum standards in terms of data collection frequency and indicator coverage set out in this proposal. If they opt for the voluntary planning, they will also incur administrative costs in drafting or updating long-term integrated plans for forests, reviewing these, and monitoring progress towards achieving the objectives set out in the plan. Administrative costs will depend on Member States’ individual starting points.

The greater use of advanced forest monitoring technologies together with improved availability and accessibility of forest data through the single digital platform of the Forest Information System for Europe will reduce the administrative burden for businesses, general public, and administrations in search of forest-related information.

• Fundamental rights

The proposal respects the fundamental rights and in particular observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It helps to uphold the right to a high level of environmental protection and to improve the quality of the environment in line with the principle of sustainable development laid down in Article 37 of the Charter.

4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

Implementation of the proposal will require human resources in the Commission, as specified in the attached legislative financial statement. The human resource implications for the Commission are expected to be addressed by making additional allocations, as outlined in the financial statement.

Implementation will also require support from the European Environment Agency for which additional resources will be needed, as outlined in the financial statement.

Costs incurred by the Commission in developing and providing core remote-sensing data and products are covered by the Copernicus programme. Costs for specific products that are not available yet, are covered by the additional resources foreseen in this regulation for the European Environment Agency.

This proposal includes articles that details further work that will be needed to implement the regulation, including an empowerment to adopt delegated or implementing acts (for example, to develop technical specifications and data collection provisions for additional indicators, including those requiring integration of remote-sensing and ground-based data).

The financial statement included in this proposal shows the detailed budgetary implications and the human and administrative resources required. The costs for the additional tasks that the Commission has to assume will be borne by the LIFE programme. The tasks entrusted to the European Environment Agency will be financed through a re-allocation under the LIFE programme. Opportunities under the EU research and innovation framework programme, such as the upcoming partnership “Forests and forestry for a sustainable future”, should further contribute to the development of improved, consistent, and up-to-date forest data in Member States.


5. OTHER ASPECTS

• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

At the latest by the entry into force of this regulation, the Commission will design a plan based on a set of milestones to track the implementation of the measures required to achieve the specific objectives (e.g. adoption of technical implementation measures on data harmonisation and standardisation and on the governance framework) against a specific timeframe.

4.

In addition, the Commission, in cooperation with Member States, will monitor the roll-out and impact of the measures on a regular basis (every two years) based on the following aspects:


- number of forest data with a common definition;

- number of forest data with harmonised or standardised data collection methods;

- data provision by Member States to the Forest Information System for Europe;

- data access via the Forest Information System for Europe (average clicks/month);

- national adaptation strategies and risk-assessment and risk-management strategies relying on common indicators;

- development of the forest digital services market (in particular, number of SMEs);

- number of voluntary integrated long-term plans adopted by the Member States;

5.

- level of alignment of voluntary integrated long-term plans with the common set of basic aspects for consideration; and


- use of EU funds in support of monitoring activities.

The Commission will also launch an evaluation based on the above-mentioned aspects and report to the Council and Parliament on the implementation of the regulation 5 years after its entry into force.

• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

The key provisions of the proposed regulation are set out below.

Article 1 sets out the subject matter of this regulation to set up a forest monitoring framework. It identifies the regulation’s guiding principles and overarching objectives, also with regard to voluntary integrated long-term planning at Member States level and strengthened governance between the Commission and the Member States.

Article 3 describes the forest monitoring system to be set up and operated by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States, specifying its elements. It lays down rules and responsibilities of the Commission and mandates the European Environment Agency to assist the Commission in implementing the monitoring system including the Forest Information System for Europe.

Article 4 sets out the rules applying to the first element of the forest monitoring system, namely the geographically explicit identification system for mapping and localising forest units.

Article 5 sets out the rules for the monitoring framework for the collection of forest data (second element of the forest monitoring system), specifying timing and data collection requirements for the Commission as regards standardised forest data and the frequency requirements for the Member States as regards harmonised forest data. It further empowers the Commission to adopt delegated acts to amend specifications for the standardised forest data included in Annex I.

Article 6 enables Member States to opt-out of the standardised collection of the forest data operated by the Commission, by providing national data in line with standardised specifications and ensuring quality assessment.

Article 7 sets out the rules applying to the third element of the forest monitoring system, namely the forest data sharing framework, specifying timing and harmonisation requirements for the Member States and providing for the relevant empowerment to the Commission to develop further technical rules. It specifies the requirements for Member States and the Commission for making the data publicly accessible, also in the Forest Information System for Europe. It further empowers the Commission to adopt delegated acts to amend the specifications for the harmonised data in Annex II.

Article 8 requires the Commission and the Member States to collect additional forest data based on appropriate methodologies and empowers the Commission to lay down such methodologies.

Article 9 specifies the responsibility of the Commission and the Member States to develop compatible data exchange systems, empowers the Commission to adopt rules to ensure the compatibility of data storage and exchange systems, and to lay down safeguards relating to the geographically explicit location of monitoring sites.

Article 10 sets out the roles and responsibilities of the Commission and the Member States to ensure data quality control, empowering the Commission to establish accuracy standards and rules on quality assessment via delegated acts and specific rules on assessment reports and remedial actions via implementing acts.

Articles 11 and 12 set up a governance framework stipulating rules and principles for coordination and cooperation between the Commission the Member States and relevant regional stakeholders, and the role of national correspondents.

Article 13 provides the possibility for Member States to develop or adapt existing integrated long-term forest plans, further specifying the aspects to be considered in the plans and the obligation to make them publicly available.

Article 16 provides that the Regulation will be kept under review and that the Commission will report on its implementation within 5 years after its entry into force.