A LULUCF-rendelet és a közös kötelezettségvállalási rendelet felülvizsgálata
Opinion factsheet
Ezen az oldalon:
- éghajlatváltozás és energiaügy
- éghajlatváltozási politika
- Mezőgazdasági, tenger- és fogyasztóvédelmi politika
- mezőgazdaság
- erdészet
Opinion number:
CDR-0061-2022
Status:
Elfogadva
Objective
Influence the legislative process for the Revision of the Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF), in particular to ensure that the local and regional dimension is taken into account.
Influence the legislative process for the Revision of the regulation on Binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States (Effort Sharing Regulation), in particular to ensure that the local and regional dimension is taken into account.
Influence the legislative process for the Revision of the regulation on Binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States (Effort Sharing Regulation), in particular to ensure that the local and regional dimension is taken into account.
Impact
On LULUCF:
Non-CO2 agriculture has not been included, coherently with the CoR position. The possibility will be assessed in a subsequent report.
The 2030 target has been kept at 310 million tonnes CO2 equivalent as proposed by the European Commission. The CoR supported this target while also proposing that each Member State should propose a more ambitious national target. The calculation system and trajectories proposed have been modified (technical modifications not possible to summarize here).
Recital 11 refers to a Council recommendation on fair transition including a reference to regions (and other entities) that will face the greatest challenges. This was not specifically included in the CoR opinion but it is generically in line.
The CoR proposed adding references to carbon capture and storage technologies. The final text adds one in Recital 24.
On Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR):
The CoR did not take explicitly position on the overall target. The overall target proposed by the EC was confirmed.
-The final text adds a reference to a Council Recommendation highlighting the need to support regions with the greatest challenges. This was not specifically proposed by the CoR but it is generically in line with the opinion.
The CoR opinion highlighted the risks of excessive flexibility as regards borrowing from annual allocations and transfers between Member States. Local and regional authorities need certainty to plan their climate and economic policies. National situations that allow flexibility under the regulation might include significant regional disparities. (Point 14 and CoR AMs 17 and 18).
>For borrowing the EC proposed 10% for 2021-2025, the CoR wanted 5% (as the EP position). Final compromise: 7,5% reducing flexibility but less than the CoR wanted.
>For transfers the final compromises actually raises the flexibility while the CoR wanted to reduce it (like the EP). The compromise only adds a new duty to inform the Climate Change Committee.
CoR AM 19 asked to include in Corrective action plans, specific provisions for regional disparities, serious structural challenges at regional level and islands. It also asked to make Corrective action plans and connected EC opinions public. The final text does not include references to regional aspects or islands but it includes provisions on publication of the plans and connected opinions.
Reply of the European Commission: https://cor.europa.eu/en/our-work/Documents/Opinions/Follow-up%20report%20CoR%20April%202022%20final.pdf
Non-CO2 agriculture has not been included, coherently with the CoR position. The possibility will be assessed in a subsequent report.
The 2030 target has been kept at 310 million tonnes CO2 equivalent as proposed by the European Commission. The CoR supported this target while also proposing that each Member State should propose a more ambitious national target. The calculation system and trajectories proposed have been modified (technical modifications not possible to summarize here).
Recital 11 refers to a Council recommendation on fair transition including a reference to regions (and other entities) that will face the greatest challenges. This was not specifically included in the CoR opinion but it is generically in line.
The CoR proposed adding references to carbon capture and storage technologies. The final text adds one in Recital 24.
On Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR):
The CoR did not take explicitly position on the overall target. The overall target proposed by the EC was confirmed.
-The final text adds a reference to a Council Recommendation highlighting the need to support regions with the greatest challenges. This was not specifically proposed by the CoR but it is generically in line with the opinion.
The CoR opinion highlighted the risks of excessive flexibility as regards borrowing from annual allocations and transfers between Member States. Local and regional authorities need certainty to plan their climate and economic policies. National situations that allow flexibility under the regulation might include significant regional disparities. (Point 14 and CoR AMs 17 and 18).
>For borrowing the EC proposed 10% for 2021-2025, the CoR wanted 5% (as the EP position). Final compromise: 7,5% reducing flexibility but less than the CoR wanted.
>For transfers the final compromises actually raises the flexibility while the CoR wanted to reduce it (like the EP). The compromise only adds a new duty to inform the Climate Change Committee.
CoR AM 19 asked to include in Corrective action plans, specific provisions for regional disparities, serious structural challenges at regional level and islands. It also asked to make Corrective action plans and connected EC opinions public. The final text does not include references to regional aspects or islands but it includes provisions on publication of the plans and connected opinions.
Reply of the European Commission: https://cor.europa.eu/en/our-work/Documents/Opinions/Follow-up%20report%20CoR%20April%202022%20final.pdf
Essential points
THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
- takes the view that local and regional authorities undoubtedly have a decisive role in the sectors covered by the Effort Sharing Regulation and the LULUCF Regulation, as these regulations require the inclusion of the territorial dimension. These are areas where local and regional authorities could be active, in view of their legal responsibilities and powers.
- shares the Commission’s assessment that the negative trend of a reduction in the carbon sink in the EU needs to be counteracted as part of achieving the long-term goal of climate neutrality; agrees with the proposed EU target of net uptake of 310 Mt CO2-eq by 2030 and proposes an additional national contribution to the 2030 net target higher than the national targets set out in Annex IIa to be set individually by the Member States. The potential to increase net carbon uptake and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the LULUCF sector varies widely between Member States. It depends on the natural production capacity of the land and the distribution of the total land area on different land use categories. The CoR believes that the increased ambitions by 2030 should be at a level that is compatible with Member States’ domestic climate policy framework and enables the development of the bioeconomy in each Member State.
- believes that a common sector for agriculture and forestry risks reducing the pressure to lower emissions in the agricultural sector and that forest-rich countries with large net uptake in forests will "compensate" for emissions in countries with a large agricultural sector or fossil emissions in general. Measures to mitigate climate change should be taken in each sector and country based on its specific conditions.
- highlights the risks of excessive flexibility as regards borrowing from annual allocations and transfers between Member States. Local and regional authorities need certainty to plan their climate and economic policies. National situations that allow flexibility under the regulation might include significant regional disparities.
- emphasises that transition must not come at the cost of territorial cohesion and must not put at risk the most vulnerable groups and territories. All Member States and sectors of the economy contribute to achieving the CO2 emission reductions, balancing considerations of fairness and solidarity. In this regard, considers that territorial impact assessments on individual farmers and foresters could provide a clearer overview of the real costs and benefits.