The Future of the LIFE Programme Brussels, 6-7 November 2019

The future of the LIFE programme Brussels, 6-7 November 2019

CONFERENCE REPORT GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU

In person All over the European Union there are hundreds of Eu- rope Direct information centres. You can find the address of the centre nearest you at: http://europa.eu/contact

On the phone or by email Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact this service:

– by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), – at the following standard number: +32 22999696, or – by electronic mail via: http://europa.eu/contact

FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU

Online Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa website at: http://europa.eu

EU publications You can download or order free and priced EU publications from EU Bookshop at: http://bookshop.europa.eu. Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre (see http://europa.eu/contact).

DISCLAIMER: The content of this document does not reflect the official opinion of the organisers. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies, nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.

PDF ISBN 978-92-76-10630-2 doi:10.2779/092877 KH-02-20-093-EN-N

© European Union, 2020 | Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Photos: © European Union 2019 The EU does not own the copyright in relation to the following elements: Photos page 45 & 47 © Joao Silva. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the EU copyright, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. Introduction 3

Opening address 4

First moderated panel discussion 5

Role of the LIFE programme 7

Break-out sessions 9

1. Nature and biodiversity 10 2. Circular economy and quality of life 16 3. Climate action 26 4. Clean energy transition 32

Keynote speech 44

Second moderated panel discussion 45

Concluding speech 47

1 © Mara Callaert

2 Introduction

The European Commission held a high-level conference in Brussels on 6 and 7 November on the future of the LIFE programme, as part of the consultation process for the next programming period (2021-2027).

The aim was to present to stakeholders the new LIFE programme, which for the first time will include a sub-programme on the clean energy transition, and obtain their input on the future direction of LIFE. Participants’ recommendations and reflections will feed into the strategic planning on the new programme, including the multiannual work programmes.

The conference’s objective was to define what LIFE can do in concrete terms to accelerate the ecological, climate and clean energy transition.

Moderated panel discussions looked at the following issues:

• The strategic achievements and areas LIFE should target. • How LIFE can contribute to the Commission’s environmental and climate objectives. • How LIFE will support a clean and fair energy transition. • Success stories so far from LIFE and, for energy, from Horizon 2020.

Four separate break-out sessions focused on the different sub-programmes in the new LIFE programme: circular economy and quality of life; nature and biodiversity; climate mitigation and adaptation; and clean energy transition. For each break-out session, three participatory workshops took place, aimed at identifying and discussing the concrete activities that could be supported by LIFE in the future to address the most pressing challenges and increase the programme’s impact.

Participants from a wide range of stakeholder groups considered these issues in world café style debates. They were asked to identify the main challenges where LIFE could help make a difference and what specific activities the programme should finance to address them. Partic- ipants then explored the key activities identified in more detail. The outcomes of these workshops were presented at plenary sessions during day 1 and 2. The conference ended with a conclusion by the European Commission and information about the next steps.

This report presents a detailed overview of the discussions held and their outcomes.

3 Opening address Making LIFE

relevant for the challenges of the future

Daniel Calleja Crespo Director General, DG Environment

This is a very important event for the European Commission. We Thanks to LIFE we have recovered extinct species. In my country, need your input so we can together reflect on how to shape the LIFE Spain, the Iberian lynx had almost disappeared and because of LIFE programme for 2021-2027 to achieve the maximum impact and it has recovered. Thanks to LIFE, we have financed Natura 2000 added value. sites, projects on the circular economy, to tackle climate change and, in the future, we will support energy projects. LIFE is the only European programme exclusively devoted to environmental protection and climate action. It will contribute to the There are two main novelties in the next LIFE programme: design of a sustainable future, and accompany the climate, ecological and energy transition. Here are some important facts about the • First, the LIFE tree has a new branch of action - the transition programme, which started in 1992. to clean energy. We have the privilege today to welcome into the LIFE community our colleagues who have been taking care First, according to the European Court of Auditors, LIFE is the best of activities relating to clean energy under Horizon 2020. While managed programme within the EU budget. An error rate of 0.2 Horizon concentrates on research and innovation, LIFE is about shows we are making good use of public funds. delivering projects on the ground - concrete solutions. We hope to bring new impetus into clean energy. Second, LIFE is the most popular programme in the EU budget. • Second, we will have an increased margin of manoeuvre, When you ask people about LIFE, in particular the young, they rec- with the possibility of increasing the programme’s focus on ognise it is delivering added value. some key activities and specific goals. We must think outside the box and decide on the future priorities. Third, in 2018 LIFE received a European Ombudsman Award for the best project in the EU. In the Małopolska region, a project used With this conference we hope to collect elements for consideration €10 million of LIFE funding to mobilise €700 million in parts of the in the multiannual work programme for 2021-2024 and, more gen- Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland - some of the EU’s most pollut- erally, for the future design of the LIFE programme. ed areas - to improve heating systems, change to more sustainable ones and improve citizens’ quality of life. The Commission’s President-elect Ursula von der Leyen has put the Green Deal as her top priority, for the EU to become more sustaina- LIFE is a success story. One reason for this is that it has constant- ble, be more effective against climate change, have a zero-pollution ly evolved. There has never been a single programming period in strategy, preserve biodiversity and deliver the changes needed in which LIFE has remained the same. This is why we are here together our society. to identify the future direction and the next improvements. Never before in the history of the Commission has the President The European Council and the Parliament have reached a partial placed an environmental priority at the top of their mandate. We agreement on the future LIFE programme, but the budget still needs must see how the new LIFE programme can reflect and contribute to be finalised. The Commission is proposing an increase from €3.4 to this very important objective. billion to €5.2 billion over the next seven years. We know how difficult these financial discussions are, but it is very important that This conference is an important first step in the process. For this, we we have a programme with the means to deliver on our ambitions. need your input and support - to continue the success story of LIFE In the news at the moment there is a report from scientists on the and adapt it to meet the challenges of the future. impact of climate change, showing the urgency of the situation, the degradation of biodiversity and the big challenges ahead. LIFE cannot solve all these issues, but it is an instrument to do better.

4 First moderated panel discussion

The members of the panel were: Fredrick Federley, Member of the European Parliament; Mauro Petriccione, Director General DG Climate Action; Ditte Juul Jørgensen, Director General DG Energy; Daniel Calleja Crespo, Director General DG Environment.

Federley highlighted some key issues Obtaining agreement from Member States The importance he believes should be addressed in fu- and the European Council on the EU budget of energy efficiency ture LIFE calls. “For example, the way we is a challenge, according to Mr Federley. build our houses: they have poor energy “They are afraid of what the Green Deal In the first panel discussion, the focus efficiency and constructing them gener- might mean for them and their econo- was on the role of LIFE for the next sev- ates enormous amounts of carbon diox- mies.” Achieving a just transition is another en years and the addition of energy to the ide. In addition, around 10-12% of global challenge but vital. “We can’t leave anyone programme. Fredrick Federley, MEP and emissions come from our clothes. But we behind or there is a danger they will turn a member of the parliament’s environment haven’t started working on a strategy to against the transition,” he concluded. committee, said the European Parliament address this, such as recycling goals, or is very happy to see energy become part looking at the materials used.” of the next LIFE programme. “Around Value for money 73% of energy used in the EU is still fos- Work must begin now to achieve the goals sil-based. We need to speed up the tran- of the Paris Agreement, Mr Federley be- Over the past seven years, LIFE has pro- sition to clean energy, ensure the Energy lieves. In five to 10 years’ time it will be vided almost €1 billion in co-financing for Union Strategy is correctly implemented too late. There are many ideas and projects climate action and the same amount at and that our actions are aligned with the taking place at municipal and regional lev- least is expected in the next budget cycle, targets for 2050.” el, and local political leaders are ready to according to Mauro Petriccione, Director move forward. He was of the opinion that General of DG Climate Action. Energy efficiency is an important area for the European Parliament, mayors and re- the new LIFE programme, as is biodiver- gional alliances could pressure Member LIFE is an excellent programme in terms of sity, water and materials substitution. Mr States to do more, though. the results for the amount spent, he said. It

5 acts as a testing ground to support people As public buildings account for a large is pollution. “Air and water quality, the with ideas and initiative, who are experi- share of energy consumption, Ms Jør- chemicals sector and industrial emissions menting with new models. “These people gensen suggested that local authorities - there are many areas where we can do do not necessarily need immense amounts and municipalities could carry out projects better. LIFE has already contributed. We of money, but they do need some to see if within LIFE to renovate schools, hospitals have to keep doing so,” he said. their ideas can work and grow. LIFE helps and other community buildings to make to plant seeds and makes them grow.” them more energy efficient, with others Mr Calleja highlighted an improvement then replicating their work. in the programme – the concept note. Pro- Member States agree on the necessity of jects can now be proposed with a simple climate action but they have questions, She stressed that the clean energy tran- concept note, with more documentation Mr Petriccione said. For example, on sition must be just, balancing resources, needed only once they have been selected. where the resources and the mechanisms cost-efficiency and energy security. Public This simple concept note will facilitate ide- will come from to ensure a just transition support and engagement is also important. as for the future, he believes. and decarbonise energy, as this will not “We need examples of projects that work be achieved through purely nature-based for local communities,” Ms Jørgensen He drew attention to the importance of solutions. “We can get to zero carbon en- said. “We can discuss energy efficiency integrated projects and the ability of LIFE ergy; the technology exists but needs in- with colleagues in Brussels but those who to mobilise other funding for actions on vestment to improve. We need a climate put it into practice are the projects them- nature, climate and energy. Still, a budget revolution and we need to fund it.” selves. We hope they will come forward is needed that reflects ambitions. “We are and show how to translate energy and running out of time and need the resourc- climate policy into effective action for the es to deliver,” Mr Calleja commented. A just clean energy clean energy transition.” As a popular programme with much sup- transition port, LIFE can showcase solutions and play Focusing on biodiversity, a positive role in raising awareness, Mr The Director General of DG Energy Ditte Calleja said. “We can build on the future said, “The fact that there Juul Jørgensen the circular economy priorities as well as finding new ways of is now a specific energy component to the enhancing awareness and bringing LIFE to LIFE programme is very good news. LIFE and pollution public attention.” achieves good results: it allows actors to test ideas and hopefully will help us and Daniel Calleja Crespo, Director General others to replicate these ideas and spread of DG Environment, highlighted three im- best practices.” portant areas for LIFE over the next seven years which are in line with the priorities of With energy production and consumption Ms von der Leyen’s Green Deal. representing 75% of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions, the clean energy transition “First, we need to put in place a very am- is extremely important. But this will not be bitious strategy on biodiversity. LIFE can achieved without a change in the way en- support many projects in this area and will ergy is consumed – how much and where be one of the key tools for improving biodi- it comes from. versity,” he said. The circular economy will be another major initiative. “For the first One of the key challenges identified is a time, we will be targeting sectors such as lack of available financing for renovating textiles. Every second a truck of textiles is buildings to make them more energy effi- dumped into landfills around the world,” cient. LIFE should be used to leverage pri- Mr Calleja pointed out. “We have to make vate investment in this area, she believes. the textiles sector circular.” The third area

6 Role of the LIFE programme

Jean Claude Merciol, Head of Unit, LIFE Programme

For the future, the European Commis- The role of the LIFE sion has proposed an increase in the pro- LIFE in the future programme gramme’s budget from €3.4 billion to €5.4 The new programme will consist of two billion. In concrete terms, this would mean main strands, environment and climate. LIFE is the only EU programme dedicat- an additional €1 billion devoted to nature The environment strand will feature ed to the environment and climate ac- and biodiversity and €1 billion for the two sub-programmes – one focusing tion. Created in 1992, at the same time clean energy transition sub-programme. on nature and biodiversity and the oth- the Birds and Habitats directives were Set to join LIFE in the next programming er on the circular economy and quality adopted, it has a current budget of €3.4 period, the clean energy transition is cur- of life. The climate strand will include a billion which represents 0.3% of the total rently implemented through the Horizon sub-programme for climate mitigation EU budget. An important programme, LIFE 2020 research programme. and adaptation and another for the clean cannot solve all environmental problems energy transition. on its own. Other actors are needed. The objectives for the new LIFE programme are: to contribute to the shift to a circular Currently, 81% of the LIFE budget is de- LIFE occupies a niche between EU pro- economy; to protect and improve the qual- voted to projects via grants. In future, this grammes for research and innovation and ity of the environment (this area includes will increase to 85%. LIFE will continue to large development programmes. As such, activities related to air, water, etc.); and to support the development and sharing of it tries to bridge the gap between research reverse biodiversity loss. This third objec- new solutions, in areas such as resource and implementation at large scale, and so tive includes implementation and manage- efficiency, agriculture and forestry, the involves a great deal of work on testing ment of the Natura 2000 network, which green and circular economy, and climate and demonstrating solutions. will remain a focal point for LIFE. mitigation and adaptation. The aim is to

7 foster innovative solutions to address toration. We will continue with activities tion. On mitigation, LIFE will continue to challenges with a range of actors. on the ground for this. support implementation of the energy and climate targets for 2030 as well as Mem- In 2014, we introduced integrated projects, Objectives for the new programme period ber States’ national energy and climate a new type of project supporting implemen- include halting and reversing biodiversity plans (NECPs). Member States are required tation on a large scale. These can be carried loss. We will also continue to support the to develop integrated NECPs covering – out at regional, national or transnational Natura 2000 network and Prioritised Ac- among others – energy security, solidarity scale in order to implement strategies and tion Frameworks (PAFs). PAFs encourage and trust, a fully integrated internal mar- action plans. Such projects provide medium- Member States to provide a comprehen- ket for energy, energy efficiency, climate to long-term support for beneficiaries, last- sive overview of the measures needed to action and industry competitiveness. A ing between six and eight years, and have implement the Natura 2000 network and third area for LIFE is the EU’s mid-term been such a success that they will continue the associated green infrastructure. Lastly, and long-term climate strategy and the in the new programme. In fact, their scope we will support mainstreaming of nature European Commission’s support for a cli- may be extended to new areas. and biodiversity objectives into other pol- mate-neutral Europe by 2050. icies and financing programmes, with the LIFE has supported recent policy develop- new strategic nature projects. On climate adaptation, LIFE will focus on ments such as the circular economy pack- three key objectives: age, the 2030 climate and energy frame- Small grants are sometimes needed. These work and the EU adaptation strategy. It have been tested in the outermost regions • Promoting actions by Member States; can also help make the application of EU and overseas territories. LIFE will build on • Climate-proofing actions at EU level environmental and climate legislation the success of these grants. by further promoting adaptation in and policy consistent across the EU. For key sectors such as agriculture, fish- example, LIFE has supported the training eries and cohesion policy, and better of judges and prosecutors. This activity is Circular economy informed decision-making on invest- included in the new LIFE regulation and ment gaps in knowledge about adap- will therefore continue. and quality of life tation; and • Further developing the European cli- A crucial element of LIFE’s success is cat- sub-programme mate adaptation platform. alysing at large scale the deployment of There are a number of environmental ar- successful solutions. LIFE projects must eas where we want LIFE to intervene. For state at the outset how their implementa- example, the green and circular economy, Clean energy transition tion can be sustainable in the long term, a noise, air, chemicals, industrial accidents, sub-programme requirement that will be maintained. marine and coastal management, soil, waste, water and the urban environment. LIFE will also increase support for main- The clean energy transition sub-programme’s The challenge is how to do so with a lim- objective is to support socioeconomic trans- streaming and integrating the environment ited budget. and climate into other polices, as well as formation, enabling the clean energy transi- mobilising investment by facilitating access tion in Europe, especially for the regions, sec- LIFE will support market players to shift tors and actors that need to catch up. to finance. For instance, LIFE provided €367 towards a sustainable and circular econ- million of support to integrated projects omy by testing new methods, processes This sub-programme will focus on ena- during 2014-2017. This mobilised addition- and business opportunities, facilitating al funds of approximately €9 billion, proving bling the energy transition in several ways. customers’ access to sustainable products One involves building the policy and regu- a huge success. A large part of this came and services. from other EU programme funds such as latory framework. This includes developing agriculture and regional development. the energy transition framework and gov- The programme will also target projects ernance in Member States, regions or local with high potential for replication, a very We are proud to have such a wide range authorities through capacity building. An- important area, as is how to mobilise the other is rolling out clean energy technology of beneficiaries in LIFE. Around one-third greatest investment of financial resources. come from private enterprises, another and services, by removing market barriers In the field of the circular economy and and improving professional skills, employ- third from NGOs and the remainder from quality of life, at present we have integrat- public authorities. All actors have their ing innovation and digitalisation, and via ed projects. In future, these will be called new business models. place and it is important to ensure the strategic integrated projects and have a support we provide encourages them to similar purpose, covering air, water and take action. The energy transition should be financed by waste as currently. They may also be ex- transforming the financial sector, through panded to other areas. supporting the development of dedicated Nature and biodiversity financial products. For locally driven investment needs, the sub-programme will sub-programme Climate mitigation provide capacity building and assistance and adaptation sub- for project promoters. It will also support Launched at the same time as the Birds consumers, raising awareness to educate and Habitats directives were adopted, LIFE programme and empower citizens to participate in the has contributed greatly to the estab- energy transition, while protecting vulner- lishment of the Natura 2000 network. The climate mitigation and adaptation able groups and territories, and tackling In the first year, projects collect all the sub-programme targets the EU’s trans- energy poverty. necessary information for the definition formation into a climate-neutral and resil- and the mechanism for management in ient society, in particular through climate In short, this sub-programme will be a cat- different Member States. This then be- change mitigation (in accordance with the alyst for EU sustainable energy policy on comes the reference for large-scale res- Paris Agreement objectives) and adapta- the ground.

8 Break-out sessions

Participants were divided into four break-out sessions, one for each LIFE sub-programme, to identify and discuss concrete activities the future LIFE programme could support to address the most pressing challenges and increase the programme’s impact.

In the first workshop, groups discussed the main challenges where LIFE can make a difference. Key challenges to be addressed as a priority were identified.

The second workshop considered how to address these key challenges and, in particular, which activities could be financed by LIFE.

The key activities identified were then explored further in the third workshop. The groups were asked to define, as far as possible: the stakeholders to be involved in each activity; ways of mobilising them; the potential risks and preconditions linked to implementing each activity; indicators to assess the results; the steps required to implement the activity; and how to ensure a snowball effect.

The main challenges are all presented hereafter under each break-out session. The activities identified to address the key challenges are also included. The findings from the third workshop are then summarised, followed by the worksheets completed by participants for each activity.

9 1 Nature and biodiversity

Summary of key challenges

Discussions during the first workshop identified several major challenges linked to nature and biodiversity. There is insufficient mainstreaming and political support for nature and biodiversity conservation, participants said. In addition, the space for nature is insufficient, due to factors such as fragmentation and small sites. Environmental pressures such as agriculture, land use intensification, urbanisation, eutrophication, invasive alien species and climate change are an issue which must be addressed as well.

Another challenge identified is a lack of knowledge on nature conservation and biodiversity, and the need to support structures which can help provide this. In addition, the LIFE programme could do more to involve private landowners and businesses in conservation work. Participants also highlighted some gaps within LIFE, suggesting that more actions be implemented outside the Natura 2000 network.

The long-term sustainability of some investments remains a challenge, to ensure these are maintained when projects end. Lastly, participants were keen to see more integration and interdisciplinary work, including between the different LIFE sub-programmes.

10 Break-out session 1 Challenges and activities identified

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Mainstreaming and political support LIFE programme rules which impact the accessibility of funding Both of these are currently insufficient for nature and biodiversity should be adapted. Specifically: conservation across the EU, in particular in the following areas: • Some obstacles were identified in terms of land purchase • Financial integration with other sectors is lacking. Current restrictions outside the Natura 2000 network and the eligi- financial programmes (including EU funding) could be better bility for LIFE support of certain types of stakeholder (e.g. used and integrated. There is also a lack of EU and national landowners or individuals). funding dedicated to nature and biodiversity. • To improve accessibility and the attractiveness of the • Political support for LIFE projects is a recurrent problem, in programme, simplifying the proposal templates and the particular the provision of co-funding. evaluation criteria was suggested. Additional capacity-build- • Conflicting subsidies and funding (including from EU sources) ing actions were recommended for potential applicants, sometimes hamper EU nature conservation efforts. including the creation of a toolbox to share best practices on • Implementation of EU nature policy lags substantially in financing. some Member States. • A more flexible approach was suggested in terms of pro- • Enforcement of the EU nature directives’ legal requirements moting small grants (with 100% co-funding), if these can is also lagging in some Member States, due to insufficient be cost effective and have a high impact for nature and capacity and/or lack of domestic political support. biodiversity. • Increasing the LIFE co-financing rates was recommended (in some cases up to 100%).

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Environmental pressures Implementing LIFE projects at larger scale could influence land use Environmental pressures impacting nature and biodiversity, name- practices, in particular agriculture. LIFE could influence the Com- ly: land use change and intensification, urbanisation and land mon Agricultural Policy (CAP) through the following: abandonment; eutrophication and atmospheric nitrogen deposi- tion; invasive alien species; and climate change. • By developing agri-environmental measures or new approaches, such as results-based payments to farmers. • Via projects developing advisory services to support Member States’ agriculture services. For example, training experts to help farmers boost biodiversity on their farmland. • By improving uptake of LIFE project results and best practices by agriculture authorities and implementing them at large scale. • By taking LIFE project results into account when defining CAP measures. For instance, taking large-scale projects such as strategic nature projects into consideration to support implementation of CAP plans, develop support services and set up training programmes.

LIFE should support win-win actions for nature and climate.

• Examples given include wetland restoration, livestock graz- ing for grasslands and sustainable forestry management. LIFE could be used to support applied research on the impact of climate change in nature.

11 Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Monitoring and baseline knowledge A lack of knowledge and monitoring hampers effective conserva- There are some deficiencies in baseline knowledge. Better and tion actions. Participants proposed that LIFE be more flexible in more efficient monitoring is needed, as is support for structures supporting the following: that provide knowledge on nature conservation and biodiversity. Knowledge of species held by taxonomists and natural history mu- • Data collection: in order to counter poor data in certain parts seums is becoming increasingly scarce, especially for lesser-known of the EU and for some lesser-known species groups. LIFE groups, such as invertebrates. could provide support for improving taxonomic knowledge, improve and spread the use of citizen science, involve the private sector, academia and natural history collections, support the use of new monitoring tools (e.g. eDNA), and promote cross-border data exchange, collaboration and coordination. • Data analysis: LIFE could promote analytical and visualis- ation tools for nature and biodiversity, and support the development of indicators, trend analyses and interdisciplinary analysis (e.g. social and economic data). • Data uptake: the programme could support centralised and open access of information to support policymaking and implementation at EU and Member State level, using LIFE data for dissemination and raising awareness.

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Involving private landowners LIFE should promote projects that connect people with nature. in conservation Specifically:

Huge potential exists to use LIFE for engaging private landowners • Those that engage and empower people, supporting bot- and businesses more in conservation work, to promote citizen sci- tom-up approaches, promoting dialogue and raising aware- ence and empower citizens further on conservation issues. ness. Projects could focus more on these areas compared to the current broader LIFE Environmental Governance and Information projects. • By promoting centres of expertise that compile best practices in public involvement, engagement and connecting people with nature and biodiversity. • Through focusing more on urban populations in such projects.

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Space for nature LIFE should be more flexible in supporting actions outside the Nat- As a result of urbanisation and agricultural encroachment, the ura 2000 network to address the lack of space for nature. Partic- space available for nature has been reduced to such an extent ipants suggested: that achieving conservation targets is increasingly challenging. The consequences of this are fragmentation, small and vulnerable • Fixing a percentage of projects or an allocated budget for Natura 2000 sites, and escalating wildlife conflicts. actions outside Natura 2000, while ensuring these actions are sustainable on a country-specific basis. • Financing more projects to improve connectivity and river Investments outside Natura 2000 continuity, and focusing on urban biodiversity issues. • Supporting actions on IUCN Red-listed species and habitats, LIFE has focused strongly on the Natura 2000 network. There are as well as more common biodiversity (e.g. species that are opportunities for extending the programme to actions outside this still widespread but declining). network, as long as investments remain sustainable. In particular, • More flexibility for actions just outside Natura 2000 site there are opportunities for: borders. • Implementation and management of MPAs should remain a • Actions on urban biodiversity and green infrastructure. priority, with LIFE continuing to support marine monitoring • Management of marine protected areas (MPAs). and inventories. • Cross-border projects, actions in the EU’s outermost regions, and actions outside the EU (i.e. targeting migratory species).

12 Break-out session 1

Challenge: Integration and interdisciplinarity

LIFE projects could be more integrative and interdisciplinary with other areas, such as the social sciences, including better integration with the objectives of other LIFE sub-programmes.

Summary of key activities explored

Discussions during the third workshop yielded a range of suggestions from participants. In the area of nature and biodiversity, they proposed that LIFE broaden its scope to cover wider issues. Exam- ples cited included species that are declining but still widespread and landscape-scale activities. Introducing the restoration of natural dynamics as a target for projects was also recommended. In addition, LIFE could be more active on Red-listed species and pollinators, many of which are not covered by EU directives.

Looking at land use and agriculture, much has been done over the past 15 years on testing and disseminating methods taken up by national rural development programmes. More work is still needed, though, and the new Common Agricultural Policy will require this. Participants suggested setting up advisory services at regional scale, using demonstration sites and identifying local champions amongst farmers who can exert peer pressure to promote appropriate measures.

Climate change is likely to present a challenge for biodiversity in Europe. Here, LIFE could do much to link nature conservation and climate change mitigation. Potential win-wins include support for forest and wetland restoration projects, as this would also help store carbon.

Discussions around knowledge, financing and public engagement came to similar key conclusions. First, that LIFE should have more flexible financing mechanisms and a greater focus on smaller projects with higher co-funding rates. Second, participants recommended that some form of dedicated mechanism for small grants be created, and called for a stronger focus on co-creation of projects with citizens and stakeholders. Lastly, supporting citizen science could help improve knowledge and mobilise more people for nature conservation.

13 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Challenge: Space for nature and investments Linking LIFE Climate change outside Natura 2000. and agriculture. and biodiversity.

Key activity: Key activity: Key activity:

Developing rules within the LIFE Developing and replicating Establishing new diverse forests programme to include areas, eco-schemes. to store carbon. habitats, species and sufficient space for dynamic species outside the Stakeholders: Stakeholders: Natura 2000 network. • Farmers, national authorities, • Farmers, local authorities, Steps: agriculture authorities and local NGOs, forest owners and experts. managers. • Increase opportunities to create space for nature outside the How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: Natura 2000 network. • LIFE should consider the • Find local champions among • Demonstrate project benefits for following as eligible: farmers. each stakeholder group. • Natural dynamics as a • Create demonstration conservation target. agriculture areas. Steps: • Activities for species that are • Engage all stakeholders early on. widespread outside Natura • Via peer pressure. • Identify areas where this activity 2000. may be needed. • Restoration and recreation Steps: • Carry out feasibility studies. outside Natura 2000. • Plan the financing. • EU and national Red-listed • Suggest or define measures • Design the forest with the species. according to the assessment involvement of local people. • Actions for pollinators. needs of species and habitats. • Establish priorities for • Test new measures and build on How to get the snowball effect: conservation and restoration existing experiences. activities. • Set up advisory services (e.g. at • Through providing information regional scale). and creating guidelines. • Hold meetings for exchanges between experts at European Risks/preconditions: level. • Create demonstration areas. • Preconditions include land acquisition, local support and How to get the snowball effect: long-term sustainability and commitment. • Through networking.

Risks/preconditions: Indicators:

• Risks include a lack of political • The area of forest created. support and reduced acceptance • Indirect indicators. from farmers. • Preconditions are the availability of sustainable funding and assuring the continuity of annual payments.

Indicators:

• The number of farmers or repetition rates. • Monitoring data of ecological conditions.

14 Challenge: Challenge: Challenge: Lack of knowledge and Political and Public support insufficient monitoring. financial support. and empowerment.

Key activity: Key activity: Key activity:

Mobilising the young to Provision of small grants. Using proof of concept projects, increase motivation. small grants for small projects, and Stakeholders: quick grants. Stakeholders: • All types of stakeholder, with Stakeholders: • Schools, universities, students, a focus on the local level and taxonomists and museums. individuals. • The general public, policymakers, volunteers, farmers and young How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: people.

• With the use of experts. • Have more flexibility on topics How to mobilise them: • Organise field trips. that can be funded and on the • Hold workshops for students to co-financing rates. • Via schools. present their work. • Have simple and short • Through networks. • Provide recognition of students’ procedures. • With rock concerts (the Latvian work and its added value for • Through capacity building. example of natureconcerthall. science. com was given). Steps: • Via use of automatic image Steps: recognition and games – the • Define the eligibility criteria (i.e. ‘gamfication’ of nature and • Carry out training in the field who can apply and what can be biodiversity. on basic ecology and new funded). technology, such as apps. • Build capacity. • Create or use existing networks. Steps: • Establish quality control data. How to get the snowball effect: • Link social media groups which • Create stepping stones for small record wildlife, plants and • Via dissemination of the grants. insects. projects’ results. • Select areas or neighbourhoods. • Integrate field data in existing • Select target groups. databases. • Organise monitoring activities. Risks/preconditions: • Create a step-by-step guide for • Empower projects developed children. • A financial sustainability plan through co-creation with the • Present collections from would be needed to guarantee objective of engaging citizens, museums. that investments via small improving ‘nature’ activities, and grants are sustainable. securing long-term commitment How to get the snowball effect: • A replicability plan would be and funding after LIFE. required to ensure projects’ • Via technology, using apps. results are replicated. • Use social media to create a • Accounts for small grants should How to get the snowball effect: community. be well certified. • Link with scientists: add value • It should be possible to have • Create an EU network of to science, collected data and individual beneficiaries. expertise and best practices. results. • Link with environmental Risks/preconditions: education programmes. Indicators: • Lack of local commitment is a Risks/preconditions: • The number of successful risk. applications. • Preconditions include use of • Risks include a lack of • The diversity of beneficiaries. experts and having stepping involvement and motivation. stones between activities to develop citizen engagement with nature. Indicators:

• The number of trainers. • The number of schools. • Validation of expert data.

15 2 Circular economy and quality of life

Summary of key challenges

Discussions during the first workshop identified a number of challenges linked to the circular economy and quality of life. Some were common to both policy areas, specifically: development and implementation of policy; governance and funding; awareness raising, education and information; and dissemination and use of best practices.

Several challenges were identified linked to the circular economy. These included: materials and their traceability; eco-design and design for circularity; circular business models; consumption; and closing the loop. In addition, the food sector and buildings are two key areas where more circularity is needed.

Participants also highlighted some key challenges relating to quality of life, namely: the urban environment (for example, air pollution and transport); pollution (including plastics, toxic substances, water and air pollution); and energy use.

16 Break-out session 2 The challenges and activities identified specific to thecircular economy were:

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Materials LIFE must support recycled materials, as these are still more costly Solutions are needed that allow for the traceability of materials/ and not considered to be of the same quality as virgin raw materi- substances in products (i.e. chemicals or hazardous substances) if als. It could do so through the following: they are to be recycled and the loop closed. The externalities and costs of virgin raw materials (their extraction and use) must be • A labelling and certification process for recycled materials: taken on board, such as labour costs or pollution. These materi- a standardised certification process would guarantee als are still too cheap when compared to recycled raw materials. that recycled materials are of the same quality as virgin Incentives should be put in place to redirect the use of secondary raw materials, allowing greater use by producers and reas- raw materials. Ensuring a stable supply of recycled raw materials suring consumers. is also a challenge. • Awareness raising and training: this is needed to teach producers about the quality of recycled materials, and provide them with assistance on using recycled and virgin raw materials to obtain the best combinations within a product. • Governance support: this is required as green public procurement (GPP) is an essential tool but difficult to implement. More projects are needed to promote and test synergies between public authorities, recyclers and end-users, and help with implementation of GPP. • Best practices and replication: these may help to implement GPP. Models of GPP focusing on the issue of recycled materials and which could be replicated at larger scale should be investigated through LIFE funding.

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Design LIFE should support the design of products and services, increas- A shift from linear to circular design is needed. Traceability of ma- ing their circularity by embedding maintenance, repair, reuse and terials must be guaranteed, with product information collected and upcycling in the design of these products and services. In particular: maintained throughout the process. Product design should embed repairability, durability, reuse and recycling, and recovery of raw materials, with no single use. Use of life-cycle assessment (LCA) • Legislative requirements should be developed and adopted and life-cycle thinking during product design should be supported on the design of products and services. and increased. • Standardisation activities would be needed for each category of products to implement the legislative requirements. Standards per category would also be useful for tracking and tracing recycled raw materials and to identify chemicals and other hazardous substances. In addition, they would provide information on testing, diagnosis and disassembly requirements. • Capacity building and re-skilling of engineers towards eco-design concepts are vital. • Awareness raising on legislative requirements and standards will be needed for both consumers and companies. • Testing and piloting of redesigned products which follow the legislative requirements and standards should be carried out and then replicated.

17 Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Business models LIFE should support business models that are based on sharing Support is needed for the creation of new business models that goods and services. Participants suggested that LIFE target the induce circularity. Considering products in terms of services following: would help achieve circularity (i.e. the services needed to create a circular economy). The cross-sectoral dimension of the circular • Financing, testing and demonstration: additional financing economy should be promoted more to ensure a variety of circular is needed to test and demonstrate new business models. business models. Detaxation models for circular activities should be tested (i.e. detaxation for businesses and consumers linked to circularity). • Best practices: business models are being developed in different countries at local and regional scale. Although they can be considered as best practices, these models are not very well known. They must be disseminated and replicated across Member States and in different contexts to ensure their adoption and upscaling. • Awareness raising: this is fundamental but must be substan- tiated with information in order to convince people about the circularity of products and to change their consumption habits. Consumers and citizens need to be re-educated on the benefits of circular products and services, in terms of cost savings and for the environment. Major information campaigns will be required for this.

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Consumption LIFE must support consumption by tackling all actors within the LIFE must address consumption by tackling all actors within the circular economy, from consumers to public authorities and busi- circular economy, from consumers to public authorities and businesses. For instance: nesses. Specifically: • GPP could be used to change public authorities’ consump- • A change in citizens’ consumption mentality and habits is tion habits. Procurement criteria should be improved to needed, making a sustainable lifestyle more desirable. De- ensure they are clear, specific and detailed. For this, tools are mand for circular products should be stimulated, through ed- needed to help procurers make informed decisions. Activities ucation and awareness raising. should be put in place to ensure GPP is implemented within • Public authorities should favour circular products, through public administrations, and tools developed to measure the GPP or by facilitating circular consumption through taxation environmental impact. (e.g. VAT) and incentives. This will require capacity building. • Through governance for public authorities: mandatory legis- • Businesses (including industry, SMEs and retailers) must lation is needed for public authorities. change their production processes, switching to eco-design • Via best practices: large-scale circular projects should be and use of secondary raw materials. Traceability is needed carried out by big businesses and public authorities which as is collaboration between producers, consumers and recy- demonstrate environmental and economic benefits and can clers. Retailers are the most important actors, being mainly be used as examples of best practice. Being at large scale, responsible for ‘take back schemes’ and allowing materials to these would facilitate a different market for consumption. be re-injected into the loop. They also provide consumers with • Indicators should be developed to demonstrate that circular information. These roles make retailers a fundamental link of products and services are better in terms of their envi- the chain. ronmental impact and costs. This would allow for greater transparency and influence consumers positively. • Through education: a new mindset must be created among consumers, including public authorities and businesses, as everyone is a consumer at some stage.

18 Break-out session 2

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Food LIFE should fund projects that can shift the sector towards sus- This sector must be tackled more using LIFE funding. Food produc- tainable food systems. Participants highlighted the following: tion is still unsustainable, with a heavy footprint. Over-packaging remains a problem within the sector and too much food waste • Awareness raising and education are essential but chang- continues to be generated. ing consumer behaviour is difficult. Information is crucial to allow consumers to make sustainable food choices. Aware- ness raising should have a long-term perspective and tools to measure these changes must be developed. Educational activities should be carried out in schools, public authorities, businesses and the agricultural sector, with a holistic approach. • Policy development and support for governance is vital to ensure a long-term perspective is implemented and that changes are enforced within society. Strategies for sustainable food systems should be developed by public authorities, and a labelling scheme created for food products to provide consumers with information. • Best practices and pilot projects that engage all stakeholders together (producers, farmers and food chain actors) must be tested. These pilot projects should then be replicated at larger scale. Projects must have an integrated approach, breaking the silos between different policy areas, such as environmental, agricultural and health policies.

Challenge: Closing the loop

This challenge concerns how waste is disposed of and which management techniques can recover the materials, bringing them back into the loop. Traceability is a precondition for closing the loop (i.e. recycling and re-injecting materials back into the economy). Chemicals present within products, for example, are under-addressed as an issue. This has an impact on the circularity and recyclability of products and in closing the loop.

Challenge: Construction/buildings

LIFE funding can help develop the circularity concept more in this sector. The main challenge is to increase the renovation of buildings in a circular way to recover as many materials as possible, to increase new construc- tions that use secondary raw materials or alternative materials to concrete, and to apply the design concept to this sector.

19 The challenges and activities identified specific toquality of life were:

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Urban environment LIFE must consider the urban environment as a complete system, e-mobility and sustainable transport systems should be encour- rather than tackling one environmental impact at a time. Materi- aged to improve urban air quality. Green spaces or surfaces and als flow within a city, generating waste and pollution. But exactly land use require better management and must be addressed by where and how they are used, or where the materials end up, is local environmental policies. unknown. Specifically: • Common indicators must be developed to set equal standards for all cities within the EU. • Best practices should be replicated. Many good pilot projects exist which are not being spread widely or scaled up. • Better governance and legislation are needed to establish strategies within the urban environment and enable replication of solutions. • Funding should be increased to implement these strategies and best practices in urban areas.

Challenge: Energy effects

Hydropower generation should be addressed and e-mobility supported further. Energy and climate are both linked to air quality and must be tackled simultaneously.

Challenge: Pollution

Water and air pollution remain important challenges. Water scarcity and quality, in particular drinking water, are still priority issues. Water management methods must be improved and techniques for water reuse implemented. Participants said the presence of toxic materials and substances is still preponderant in our cities. Air quality in the urban environment is poor. To improve it, e-mobility and transport should be encouraged. Indoor air pollution is also creating health issues for EU citizens. These polluting substances pose a double threat since they re-enter the cycle when washed out of the home. Plastic pollution is another major challenge requiring immediate action.

20 Break-out session 2 The following overarching challenges were found to be common for both the circular economy and quality of life policy areas:

Challenge: Policy development and implementation

Currently, fragmented legislation creates issues when implementing projects which cover contrasting policies. Legislation must be more effective, creating incentives and disincentives, while also addressing the circularity concept better.

Challenge: Funding opportunities and governance

Different funds should be streamlined and co-financing allowed from different funds. Funding shouldbe adapted to support the transition from research to implementation of LIFE priorities. It should also allow for scaling up of projects. More information on funding opportunities needs to be provided.

Challenge: Awareness raising, education and information

The circular economy and quality of life concepts are broad and require active involvement of stakeholders (e.g. citizens, businesses, public authorities and NGOs) who need information, educating and capacity building. Information must reach all citizens through awareness raising and education.

Challenge: Best practices

Many best practices have been developed but not widely disseminated or utilised. Replication and upscaling is needed for some of these practices to facilitate a greater impact.

21 Summary of key activities explored

Discussions during the third workshop centred on activities relating to five challenges: design, materials, consumption, the urban environment and food. Some common activities were identified as solutions for more than one challenge, in particular in the following areas: certification and data; governance focusing on GPP; awareness raising, information and education; and dissemination of best practices.

In terms of certification and data, a key message was that LIFE projects should include all actors in the value chain. The importance of LCA assessments was stressed, as reli- able data are needed on amounts and types of materials, as well as to track and trace materials for information purposes. On the certification side, there are too many labels available which can be confusing for consumers. However, LIFE projects can help to scale up and create a market for certified products. These activities were all linked to the challenges around design, materials and food.

Looking at governance and GPP, participants said the focus must shift to criteria for circular products. A move to green products is needed and procurers must be given the tools to identify these. A database of green products already exists in one country, something which could help support procurers elsewhere in their choices. Participants recommended involving end-users as well as procurers in the process. These activities were cited as important for challenges around food, the urban environment and consumption.

A cluster of activities was explored on awareness, information and education, all of which lead to lifestyle changes. Labels on circular materials and products can boost awareness and information, while reaching out to young people in schools increases education. Participants stressed that awareness and information activities must encom- pass the whole chain and target all actors. For example, people must be trained on GPP and made aware of the issues involved. As officials are not environmental specialists, simple criteria are needed to train them on where to find information and how to use it. This cluster was found to be common for all challenges.

For dissemination of best practices, discussions focused on how to select these practices, which should be done using indicators, and how to disseminate them throughout the EU. Suggested solutions included the creation of a database of best practices or the use of EU platforms in general. LIFE projects could be used to mobilise other funding, helping to spread best practices. An important role for the programme, this could support the roll-out of innovative ideas which can then be scaled up. Dissemination of best practices should involve all actors, from national and EU-level institutions to the production value chain, retailers, consumers and recyclers. This applies for both the circular economy and quality of life.

Lastly, the environmental governance and information (GIE) component of the LIFE programme was described as an important area with great potential. Funding is essential to support and strengthen this component. Indicators are fundamental but those used are not always appropriate, for example to identify best practices, participants said.

22 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Materials Materials

Key activity: Key activity:

Closing the loops of certain products such as solar panels Supporting governance through GPP and developing rules for after their lifetime. Ideally, these should be recycled, secondary raw materials. refurbished or reused. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • Local authorities needing to implement GPP criteria, the • All stakeholders should be involved, including industry, legislators who must review these criteria, suppliers of product users and public authorities. More industrial secondary raw materials and recyclers. sectors must be brought on board to tackle this issue. How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: • Organise specialised thematic workshops to group • Hold workshops bringing stakeholders together to stakeholders together and discuss GPP criteria. All discuss and define issues. stakeholders should be involved in a project to guarantee • Create business opportunities. full uptake of the results. • Highlight the environmental and eco benefits. Steps: Steps: • Targets must be set and a product’s environmental • Establish the amount of virgin or secondary materials performance defined. This will define the product’s present in a particular product. quality criteria and, consequently, the criteria needed in • Identify the various sectors involved and the crossovers the product’s design phase. between them for each product. • Define the reusability and recyclability of the product. • Map out the refurbishing, reuse and recycling • Establish which services must be purchased and possibilities, and invite business partners to develop a procured. business case based on recycling and closing the loop • Prioritise the criteria identified for products and for each product. services. • Stimulate public authorities to adapt legislation, removing barriers linked to contrasting regulations. How to get the snowball effect:

Risks/preconditions: • Use of GPP criteria must be mandatory and enforced by legislation to ensure adoption by all public authorities • There may be licence issues. and other stakeholders, thus creating and expanding • Regulations must be harmonised between Member the market for circular materials. States. Certain products are considered as waste in some Member States but as products in others which Risks/preconditions: creates barriers for recycling. • There are risks linked to setting up new business Indicators: models. However, these can be overcome if the GPP criteria are set in legislation and enforced, as the • How much is reused and recycled. models will have to change based on the criteria. • The amount of primary materials still required. Indicators:

• Satisfaction with the services delivered. • Percentage of secondary raw materials used in procurement.

23 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Design Consumption

Key activity: Key activity:

Involving stakeholders. Using GPP as a stimulus for the market, given the amount of products and services required by public authorities. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • All stakeholders along the supply and production chain should be considered and involved from the • Public authorities and their suppliers. A market dialogue beginning. They include manufacturers, standardisation should be created between them. bodies, policymakers, consumers, investors, recyclers, operators, Member States, the European Commission How to mobilise them: and its agencies, and maintenance organisations. • Provide training for public administrations. How to mobilise them: • Generate a market dialogue.

• Create a transversal community. Steps: • Develop a knowledge base. • Exchange best practices. • Create a national database of green products to guide • Highlight the benefits that could be obtained and public authorities. Green criteria are in place but these business cases. do not specify what green products exist. Moving from the criteria to choosing the right green products is Steps: needed. Public authorities are not experts in impact assessments and must be guided in their choice of • Use existing stakeholder communities to ensure the green products. involvement of all from the beginning. • Develop capacity building on this specific issue. • Develop LCAs and cost benefit analyses to understand • Monitoring and measuring the impact of green products a product’s impacts. is essential. • Test and pilot the products. • Develop capacity building and re-skilling. How to get the snowball effect: • Develop track-and-trace systems to ensure full understanding of a product, covering the whole chain to • Disseminate good examples of ‘successful purchasing guarantee traceability of materials and transparency of changes’ within public authorities widely. information for end-users. • Produce certifications and standards for Risks/preconditions: eco-designed products. • Promote communication related to eco-designed • There are difficulties in defining whether a product is products and creation of labels. green and in carrying out a proper impact assessment. • Implementation of green criteria may be too much How to get the snowball effect: work for some public authorities.

• Communication is a good tool for helping all users see the benefits linked to a designed product. Companies Indicators: can state their product is green, while consumers benefit from transparent information about the product. • Increased purchasing of green products. • Co-creation with all involved will increase the likelihood • Results from environmental impact assessments of of a greater impact, influence and uptake. products. • Effort assessments of public authorities. Risks/preconditions: • Measure whether the suppliers have increased.

• Some important impacts could be missed or not analysed when designing a product. • Developing a clear labelling scheme is important, as many already exist. An additional scheme could produce negative effects if not conceived and communicated well.

Indicators:

• Increased recycling rates. • Lower use of virgin materials. • Increase in consumer trust.

24 Challenge: Challenge: Food Urban environment

Key activity: Key activity:

Creating a sustainable food system within cities using Replication of best practices. governance and awareness raising together. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • The construction sector, municipalities, citizens, utilities, • Farmers and producers, operators within the food chain, businesses, mobility and regional networks, and the local authorities, citizens, NGOs, and the research and Covenant of Mayors. scientific community. How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: • Motivate stakeholders on the objectives to be • A competition to find innovative ideas on food achieved, such as: renaturalisation of urban habitats, production, distribution and consumption could be improvement of citizens’ health, aggregating energy organised among the stakeholders. savings, waste reduction, resource efficiency, increasing urban resilience and legislating on the urban footprint. Steps: • Use the Covenant of Mayors as a mobiliser.

• Map the main impacts of cities as a starting point for Steps: addressing a sustainable food system correctly. • Map stakeholders at local level to determine the key • Identify and communicate the best practices already actors to be involved from the beginning. developed through programmes such as LIFE. • Create a food council where stakeholders can meet to • Calibrate the criteria already developed so they can be discuss specific objectives and solutions, to move the applied to conditions at local level. transition forward. Bringing all stakeholders together • Carry out small-scale and progressive interventions through these councils would help shift from specific while measuring impacts (i.e. the no-harm criterion). interests to policies which integrate all aspects. • Develop capacity building. • Involve and inform citizens through information and • Set technical standards. awareness raising activities. Target specific citizens, • Develop a powerful vision for the EU and Member especially young people and schoolchildren, to develop States. ambassadors for new food systems. • Promote best practices and replication of local pilots to How to get the snowball effect: ensure awareness and encourage uptake. • Create an easy system for exchanging best practices between cities. How to get the snowball effect: • Use green criteria for public procurement. • Increase the rate of urban regeneration. • Adopt food policies making legislation obligatory. • Scale up at EU level. • Use ambassadors for new food systems (i.e. young people). Risks/preconditions:

Risks/preconditions: • Political willingness is needed. • Data and tools are lacking in some Member States. • Ensure all stakeholders are aligned on the definition of • Criteria to analyse and compare best practices must be sustainable food systems. Many definitions exist; using developed. a common definition ensures all are working on the • Financial support is needed for urban regeneration. same concept. • Long-term support is required.

Indicators: Indicators: • Key performance indicators. • The number of food councils created. • Use systems with environmental criteria as indicators, • Mapping of impacts and stakeholders. such as the EU Ecolabel and LCAs. • The number of local food policies developed. • Accessibility of best practices. • The number of initiatives created for students, young • EU scalability of best practices. people and citizens in general.

25 3 Climate action

Summary of key challenges

Discussions during the first workshop identified a number of challenges linked to climate action which fall under three broad categories. Firstly, participants highlighted some key areas where the enabling conditions for LIFE projects should be improved. These include: upscaling successful projects; stakeholder engagement; private sector involvement; governance; procurement; and measuring the impact of project results in the long term.

Secondly, participants identified several issues that could be addressed by LIFE climate action projects. Specific topics highlighted include peatland management and sustainable mobility, as well as mainstreaming adaptation measures within land use.

Lastly, there are challenges linked to the LIFE programme itself, participants said, such as the application procedure for projects and how to feed results into policymaking at national and EU level.

26 Break-out session 3 Challenges and activities identified

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Enabling conditions Common indicators should be established for measuring emissions from land use, Participants identified key areas where land use change and forestry (LULUCF). the enabling conditions for LIFE projects should be improved. • There is a standardised approach for measuring emissions from transport and These include: industry but no agreed standards for LULUCF measurements. The effects of emissions from LULUCF during a LIFE project are almost imperceptible as they • Stakeholder engagement: coop- are long term. LIFE indicators could be linked to global standards (e.g. the In- eration with potential stake- tergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or Eurostat) to ensure a harmonised holders is important and new reporting system. This system should also include a way of measuring indirect beneficiaries should be encour- emissions in effluents. Participants suggested a special LIFE call be held or the aged to apply. political process used to facilitate harmonised reporting.

• Private sector engagement: pri- The private sector should be engaged more in LIFE to meet the challenges of cli- vate companies must be involved mate change. more in LIFE in order to meet the challenges of climate change. For • A mechanism is needed to ensure cities are responsible for addressing emis- example, the insurance sector sions targets, by forcing industries within cities to comply with emissions limits could be engaged more on adap- (the ‘polluter pays’ principle). The Covenant of Mayors is a potential tool for im- tation issues. plementing this. LIFE projects could act as laboratories to prove this is possible, at city level and by industry sector. • Governance: LIFE could help inno- • Flexible funding and impact funding could be used to increase the business vate on governance to improve sector’s engagement in LIFE. In this scenario, a specific project budget would collaboration between une- be guaranteed, with the beneficiaries able to unlock more funding if ertainc qual stakeholders for tackling milestones are reached. This would require robust indicators, and be dependent climate change. In particular, on influencing factors beyond the project. Climate Change Governance and Information projects could help Effective participation of citizens should be increased, both in LIFE projects and in the to coordinate governance at proposal writing stage. local level. • Trust building is important to increase citizens’ effective participation. This could • Procurement: increased em- be achieved via a coordinated co-creation process that builds communities. phasis is needed on the carbon Financing for the process could come from community funds. footprint in the public sector to • Incentives and penalties may motivate communities and citizens to participate. ensure green public procurement • Flexible projects, greater involvement of National Contact Points (NCPs) and is rolled out. more technical support for proposals should also help boost participation.

• Indicators: the impact of project Ensure that LIFE project results are sustained after the projects come to a close. results must be measured long term, particularly for nature-based • More support for network building, in particular for regional and topic-based solutions where the effects are networks, would help to ensure sustainability of results. An example from Italy seen long after a project ends. was highlighted which has mechanisms for sharing results of completed projects Common indicators are needed with regional authorities and setting up study visits. This can unlock financing which lead to clear results. from the European Regional Development Fund to continue a project’s work. • Connecting with regional policymakers could also help to sustain results after • Upscaling: continuation of projects are completed. successful projects should be ensured and results scaled up. In Climate action topics should be included in the multiannual work programme to particular, LIFE could help scale provide stability in priority areas for the next four years. up nature- or ecosystem-based solutions and showcase projects • These topics can be fine-tuned in the texts of individual calls for proposals. Better for SMEs to facilitate upscaling. recognition of synergies is needed between different climate action topic areas.

27 Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: LIFE programme’s implementing rules Potential beneficiaries should receive more assistance during the Some key challenges were identified relating to the LIFE applica- LIFE application process. tion process and the programme as a whole. These comprised: • NCPs are of great importance. The current practice of grant- • Application procedure: the application process for LIFE is ing NCPs access to the eProposal tool, used by applicants more challenging than for Horizon 2020, in particular for to build and submit LIFE project proposals, is valuable. projects containing both climate change mitigation and Participants suggested that LIFE provide NCPs with a tool to adaptation aspects. support and assist applicants, which would also help engage • Diverse needs: some regions in the EU suffer from an im- new applicants in proposal writing. balance in development, making mitigation and adaptation planning difficult. Customisation of the programme could help meet the needs of different areas, in particular diverse or lower-income regions. • Funding: the level of match-funding required presents a signif- icant challenge. Where there is a limited budget available to change standard practices, it is difficult for projects to prioritise. • Results: feeding programme results into policymaking is a challenge at both EU and national level, as aligning political agendas with climate goals is difficult. Capacity building is needed, including support to build policy from best practices, and to help public and private organisations develop a strategy for climate neutrality.

Challenge: Transport/sustainable mobility

CO2 emissions from transport must be reduced and a shift encouraged towards more community-style mobility, such as car sharing.

Challenge: Peatlands

Management of peatlands, which play a large role in CO2 emissions, is crucial for reducing these emissions and in terms of national carbon accounting.

Challenge: Land use

Adaptation measures must be mainstreamed. Demonstrations could help lead to new land-use practices, in particular using nature-based solutions.

28 Break-out session 3

Summary of key activities explored

Discussions during the third workshop focused on the following areas: fostering carbon sequestration in agriculture, increasing participation in LIFE - both from the business sector and more effective participation in general - and simplifying the application process for LIFE projects.

Participants considered how a payment scheme could be developed to foster carbon sequestration in the farming sector. In particular, they looked at ways of incentivising farmers to sequester carbon as part of their agricultural practices. To achieve this, suitable agricultural measures must be identified and pilot projects developed. This is an area where LIFE could play a key role. Financial benefits for farmers could help to motivate action in this area, alongside legal obligations.

Private sector participation in LIFE is good, and increasing, for climate change mitigation. However, this could still be improved and the adaptation side remains dominated by the public sector. Incentives should be put in place to attract more participation from the business sector in this area. This may require changes to the co-funding system, as private sector beneficiaries have more difficulty securing co-financing at national level for adaptation. Simpli- fication of the application process would also be beneficial for increasing the business sector’s involvement in LIFE climate action.

To ensure the participation of citizens and governments at local level, co-creation is important at the preparation stage of LIFE projects. Participants suggested engaging stakeholders prior to the development of a proposal, where feasible, although some actors do not have the capacity, time or willingness to engage in the process before a proposal is written. For certain types of project proposal, financial incentives could help ensure that the co-creation process engages different actors from civil society. Applicants should be allowed a one-year timeframe to develop such proposals, participants said.

Lastly, they recommended the application procedure for LIFE projects be simplified. Systems should be made accessible to non-experts and a simplified application process published. Horizon 2020 was identified as a best practice example, along with application processes at national level. Partici- pants suggested that the multiannual work programme be co-designed and individual call documents developed using a working group or some other mechanism to facilitate co-creation.

29 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Challenge: Establish common indicators Increase the business Increase the effective with clear targets. sector’s participation in participation of stakeholders, LIFE climate action. including citizens, in LIFE. Key activity: Key activity: Key activity: Developing payment schemes for farmers and landowners for carbon Creating attractive incentives to Developing project proposals sequestration. encourage business to participate. which are co-created with different stakeholders. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • Stakeholders include farmers, • Companies and industry farming associations, associations. • Citizens and private sector landowners, food retailers, institutions. researchers, public authorities Steps: and NGOs. How to mobilise them: • Communicate plans to How to mobilise them: stakeholders. • For certain types of project • Create new co-funding systems proposal, provision of financial • For farmers, farming as private sector beneficiaries incentives for a co-creation associations and landowners, have more difficulty attracting process (e.g. funding for one via the financial benefits and national co-financing. year) could engage different the need to reach climate actors from civil society. targets. Social responsibility and financial motivation can, Steps: respectively, mobilise food retailers and researchers, while • Create a core group of public authorities and NGOs are stakeholders, identify the main mobilised by legal obligations. beneficiary and write a detailed concept. Steps: • Following project approval, involve all stakeholders and • Identify the relevant agricultural project partners, develop a measures and their impact on detailed proposal and work on sequestration. formal agreements. • Apply the measures at pilot scale. • Consider the relative merits of Risks/preconditions: public and private funding models, including public funding at EU • Funding would be guaranteed and national level. Private funding for one year. depends on securing the interest • The scale may be too ambitious of actors such as food retailers. for co-creation. • Provide feedback to policymakers.

How to get the snowball effect:

• Through legislation. • By capacity building. • Via the financial motivation provided by the payment scheme.

Risks/preconditions:

• Identifying and measuring the indicators is complex. • The payment scheme may be complex to administer.

Indicators:

• Emissions levels. • The level of carbon sequestration.

30 Challenge: Challenge: Increase the effective Simplify the application process participation of stakeholders, for LIFE funding, ensuring it is including citizens, in LIFE. accessible to non-experts.

Key activity: Key activity:

Ensuring co-creation ahead of the Conducting a co-creative review LIFE project preparation phase. process to produce a simplified application procedure for publication. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • Teachers and citizen activists. • Expected LIFE project applicants, How to mobilise them: National Contact Points (NCPs), project evaluators, the European • Hold stakeholder meetings. Commission, EASME, project • Through strong communications. monitors, external advisers • Via social media. from other programmes and policymakers. Steps: How to mobilise them: • Carry out stakeholder mapping and definition of the topic. • Invite stakeholders to participate • Establish survey methodology in a working group through an and a communication plan. open call. • Conduct the survey, then analyse, publish and present the Steps: results. • Define the project objectives and • Seek out best practices. means. • Assemble a working group with • Forward the final project all stakeholders to co-design the proposal to those involved in its process. coordination. • Formalise the application process proposal. Risks/preconditions: • Implement the process using information technology (i.e. an • Risk management will be online form), publish guidelines required. on it, train NCPs and promote • The response rate may be low. the process. • There could be difficulty • Test and improve the application achieving consensus. process as needed. • Lack of understanding is also a risk. How to get the snowball effect:

• Make the process for integrated Indicators: projects more iterative, by increasing the number of • At least 50% of people living feedback loops. in the relevant area should be offered the possibility to Risks/preconditions: respond and provide input. • There may be an increase in lower quality project applications with poorer outcomes.

Indicators:

• Applicants’ satisfaction rates. • The rate of project approval. • The average application time.

31 4 Clean energy transition

Summary of key challenges

Discussions during the first workshop identified a number of challenges linked to the clean energy transition, including its implementation on the ground and under the LIFE programme.

Participants said the demand side must be activated to contribute to the clean energy transition, which will include mobilising energy consumers. Activating the market for this transition represents another challenge. For example, market barriers to energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy businesses will have to be removed. A locally driven energy transition is needed but presents an additional challenge, as does the mobilisation of financial flows and investments to achieve the clean energy transition.

Policy design and implementation was another issue highlighted, with participants stressing the need for putting the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle into practice in policy design and strategy development. Lastly, they identified the design and implementation of the LIFE programme itself as a challenge, including the integration of energy into LIFE and the programme’s co-funding rates.

32 Break-out session 4 Challenges and activities identified

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Activating the market for a clean Business operations should be transformed to contribute to the energy transition clean energy transition. In particular, through the following:

The different market actors must be mobilised to achieve this • Creation of new integrated services, products and business transition. The continuous professional development and educa- models. New energy solutions are needed for businesses as tion or training of professionals involved should be ensured. Entire well as for homeowners. For this, market-intelligence testing, business operations must be transformed to contribute to energy policy support and capacity building are required. It is impor- efficiency and renewables objectives, and the energy system’s -in tant to raise awareness, especially among small companies. frastructure and operations adapted to support the clean energy Europe should become a global leader in viable solutions for transition. Challenges linked to this include: the energy transition.

• Removing market barriers to the development of new busi- • Supporting the development of policies promoting the clean nesses targeting energy efficiency and renewable energy. energy transition in businesses. Stronger political signals • Building capacity within companies. are needed on the importance of the energy transition in • Building trust in the market. business. Achieving the transition will be easier with the right • Ensuring access to data. policies in place. Segmentation should be used to mobilise • Training workforces to provide the skills needed for renewa- early movers and regulatory pressure for others. ble energy and energy efficiency technologies. • Supporting industry and SMEs to become ‘prosumers’ (i.e. both consuming and supplying energy) and part of local energy systems, in collaboration with local authorities and consumers. Some businesses supply energy solutions and others are energy consumers. They should be helped to move towards becoming ‘prosumers’.

33 Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Activating the demand side for Buildings must contribute to the energy transition. Specifically, a clean energy transition participants suggested:

Buildings are an important aspect of this and should interact with • Support for local energy urban planning leading to zero ener- the energy system to contribute to the transition (e.g. by providing gy districts. Here, the focus must not only be on buildings. energy efficiency and flexibility, energy generation and storage). Issues such as mobility, renewables, information and communications technology and energy storage should also be In addition, consumers must be activated (i.e. individuals, busi- covered, taking a holistic approach. nesses, public and private consumers) and citizens engaged to • Support for large-scale deep renovation to enable smart participate in the transition. districts and remove rigidity of heat demand (e.g. heat can be stored in the thermal mass of buildings). The challenge of decarbonising heating and cooling will need to be addressed. • Multidisciplinary analysis of the rebound effect of zero energy buildings. Better energy efficiency tends to result in a fall in energy costs. Users may therefore consume more energy than they would otherwise. Heating systems must be adjusted to lower demand. • Inclusion of externalities in calculations of cost optimality. • Demand-response testing and demonstration with all elements should be carried out. • Support for local energy storage and trade.

Consumers, including citizens, must be engaged as active players in the clean energy transition. This could be achieved by:

• Encouraging market uptake for renewable energy communities and local energy cooperatives, for instance through sharing best practices. All local stakeholders must be mobilised, including SMEs and local authorities. • Developing business models to support private home energy retrofits. • Funding a platform where local actors can meet and exchange ideas on community energy projects. • Supporting zero emission strategies for local authorities.

34 Break-out session 4

Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Activating a locally driven To facilitate a locally driven energy transition, participants sug- energy transition gested:

To create local energy communities which include ‘prosumers’ • Use of specific ‘change agents’ for the clean energy transi- (those who both produce and consume energy), it is necessary to tion. These would be needed at community and local level, identify local champions – or agents of change – and address pub- and might include politicians, administrations, energy agen- lic authorities’ lack of capacity. cies and communities. Change agents should be identified and supported to help drive the transition. • A major focus on legislative change is needed, with exchange of best practices on legislative solutions and successful policies. Capacity should be built for communities to review and advocate for enforcement of legislation. • Exchanging best practices, for example through ambassadors. Best practices exist in different programmes such as Horizon, Interreg and Erasmus, as well as in locally funded activities. These should be shared (including in different languages to address language barriers). Leaders in this area often do not have time to be best practice ambassadors, and should therefore be provided with resources to communicate their messages, nationally or transnationally. • Increasing communities’ capacity to review and advocate for enforcement of legislation to activate these communities at local level. • Open data models are needed to engage and support community energy.

Capacity building should be provided for local and regional authorities. In particular:

• The achievement of political will could be supported via a platform for technical and political exchange on successful projects. • Knowledge exchange is needed on energy efficiency measures, multiple benefits and integrating energy efficiency and renewable energy systems, translating public savings into consumer benefits and waste heat. Peer-to-peer learning should take place between cities and regions. • Implementation of sustainable action plans requires support. Many municipalities have such plans but follow-up is needed on implementing them. LIFE could be a good vehicle to support implementation by providing toolkits as well as through monitoring and gathering of data on successful methods. • Training in financial engineering is needed for municipal staff. For example, the use of public and private funding streams to develop municipal energy service companies (ESCOs) or foster partnerships between ESCOs and public authorities to realise clean energy transition projects. Local energy agencies could provide support for local authorities via technical assistance, a one-stop-shop or an aggregation of projects.

35 Challenge: Activities to address this challenge: Mobilising private investments Financial instruments for mobilising private investments should and ensuring the flow of financing to sustainable energy pro- be identified. Participants suggested: jects. Financing flows for the clean energy transition must be ensured, including new financial instruments to leverage more • Demonstrating the benefits of de-risking instruments. The private funding. benefits of EU-level instruments should be demonstrated at national level, and this should be linked to national energy and climate plans. Some work is needed to show what guarantee instruments could achieve in the renewables sector. • Supporting replication of successful financial instruments. For example, revolving funds, on-bill financing, on-tax schemes, blended finance, forfaiting funds and municipal or green bonds. • Provision of technical assistance for public and private bodies to build project pipelines. In particular, to complement European Investment Bank support schemes usually aimed at larger investments. Some municipalities lack skills or capacity in the context of building renovations as well as in financing actions from their sustainable energy and climate action plans. • Developing strategies to better understand financing mechanisms for deep renovation, and new business models for investors. Policy dialogue is needed with banks and investors at national level.

Challenge: Supporting policy design and implementation

Workshop participants identified several challenges in this area. Specifically:

• Building coherence among policy objectives (via a multidisciplinary, holistic approach). • Putting the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle into practice in policy design and strategy development, integrating the multiple-benefits concept into decision-making processes. • Supporting multi-level governance, enforcement and implementation of policy. • Designing and implementing policies for a socially fair transition, covering energy poverty, fuel poverty and sufficiency. Ensuring a just clean energy transition which is beneficial for all groups and territories, with none paying a higher price for the transition and instead benefiting from the new job opportunities created.

Challenge: The rules and design of the LIFE programme

In particular, the co-financing rate for LIFE (60%) compared to Horizon 2020 (100%).

36 Break-out session 4

Summary of key activities explored

Discussions during the third workshop generated a variety of suggestions from participants. First, to activate the clean energy transition at local level the LIFE programme could help identify local ‘change agents’. Potential agents of change for driving this transition may be found in very different sectors. For example, politicians, administrations, businesses, citizens, consumers, local energy agencies or energy sector actors – any or all of these could fulfil this role. To motivate agents of change, it is important to determine the local benefits that matter to them, alongside mapping local stakeholders who could support or block change. Showcasing success stories in other communities should help ensure replication. Demonstrating the benefits for society, the economy and infrastructure can raise the ambition of other communities to follow suit.

Two activities were identified to help transform business and business operations to contribute to the energy transition.

Firstly, supporting the development of enabling policies encouraging business to take an active role. The key stakeholders here are policymakers – at local, regional, national and EU level – as well as trade associations, chambers of commerce and business networks which can exert their influence and lobby for change. Highlighting the economic and financial benefits to policymakers could facilitate this transforma- tion, along with organising study tours to increase knowledge about the clean energy transition among public administrations and business networks.

Secondly, businesses should be supported to become ‘prosumers’. That is, both producers and consumers of energy. Demonstrating new business opportunities with a clear competitive advantage for those taking an active role in the energy transition would help mobilise stakeholders, such as large businesses, SMEs, utilities and other energy sector actors.

Some key steps for this involve market segmentation, identification of local or regional synergies, demonstration of business models and de-risking activities via insurance or other instruments. The impact can be ensured by creating clusters of businesses and consumers to harvest energy synergies. Public support would be needed for data exchange and disclosing information, as confidentiality of commercial data means there is little possibility for applying peer-to-peer best practice exchange in the business environment. Public intervention could help secure open access to data and information.

This break-out session also explored building the capacity of public authorities, with a focus on supporting implementation of sustainable energy action plans in small municipalities lacking the capacity to participate in larger projects. With public authorities and local supply chain actors as stakeholders, the steps identified for this capacity building include: mapping of financial needs and barriers, prioritising the actions to implement, analysis of local value chains, and mapping of potential financing sources. A snowball effect should be ensured via the creation of natural aggregators, who would provide stabilised framework conditions. Participants suggested that this might be done at inter-communal level (aggregating several smaller municipalities), or at regional or some other level in order to pool investment projects under common framework conditions.

Lastly, discussions centred on ensuring the supply of financing for the energy transition. For instance, the replication of specific financial products or instruments, such as green mortgages. Demonstrating the financial returns as well as the environmental benefits is key to mobilising stakeholders – namely, financial institutions and institutional investors – while a snowball effect could be ensured through promotion of these instruments.

37 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Transform business operations to contribute Transform business operations to contribute to the clean energy transition. to the clean energy transition.

Key activity: Key activity:

Supporting the development of policies promoting the clean Supporting industry and SMEs to become ‘prosumers’ and energy transition in businesses. part of local energy systems.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders:

• Businesses, trade associations and chambers of • Technology providers, utilities, energy service commerce are critical stakeholders, along with companies (ESCOs) and financers. politicians and policy administrators. How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: • Via new business opportunities for technology • Through the broader socio-economic benefits of providers. engaging them in the energy transition. For example, • With a narrative focusing on competitiveness and job creation and retention, local energy-related jobs, ‘future proofing’. and rooting businesses in the locality. • Trade associations and networks need increased Steps: competence and capacity to influence energy policy. Clusters could be developed to work on this. • Those businesses most able to become ‘prosumers’ should be targeted first (e.g. use the 80/20 approach, Steps: tackling the 20% that have an immediate opportunity to achieve this). Some businesses do not have the real • Identify the current gaps, barriers and opportunities estate or large enough energy consumption to become that exist in developing or improving policies at local, ‘prosumers’. regional or national level, as well as the capacity • Local and regional suppliers should be considered, not of local and regional authorities to influence policy just from a business or industry perspective but how changes and share good practice among Member they fit within the local overall energy supply system, States, depending on where the competency sits. thus integrating risks and local needs. • Build capacity among policymakers: enable • Showcase different models. A variety of models exist, policymakers to meet and exchange best practices, such as ‘build and operate’ or ESCOs. Some will suit allowing them to understand the benefits for certain businesses and sectors better than others. businesses. How to get the snowball effect: How to get the snowball effect: • High quality data is needed for businesses to showcase • Mechanisms are needed – ideally, publically funded – their investment. to share data appropriately. Some businesses may be • Put in place appropriate policies. reluctant to do so due to commercial sensitivities, but • Create clusters of sustainable energy technology this is important for other businesses to follow suit and providers and businesses. to build momentum. Risks/preconditions: Risks/preconditions: • There are risks in how businesses conduct financial • There may be a disconnect between national policy and appraisals. Some have particular demands in terms of local/regional policy and authorities. payback. This narrative should be changed to focus on • Some businesses have little or no interest in energy as the rate of return. it is a small part of their turnover. Indicators: Indicators: • Primary energy. • The local/regional energy balance. • The percentage of renewables. • The percentage of renewables. • New technology solutions and innovations. • The reduction in primary energy. • Job creation/retention. • Job creation/retention.

38 Challenge: Challenge: Activate buildings as part of the energy system Activate buildings as part of the energy system to contribute to the clean energy transition. to contribute to the clean energy transition.

Key activity: Key activity:

Supporting large-scale deep renovation to enable smart Supporting local energy urban planning leading to zero districts and remove rigidity of heat demand. energy districts.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders:

• The main stakeholders are architects’ associations, • Architects’ associations, local authorities, building local authorities, building professionals and building professionals and building owners, as well as owners. renewables suppliers, public transport and active mobility planners, district heating companies and How to mobilise them: energy firms.

• Bring the various stakeholders together. How to mobilise them: • Provide training for public administrations. • Guarantee the result of renovation schemes (a • Hold stakeholder roundtables. performance guarantee). • Involve health associations. • Have clear business incentives to engage the private sector. • Via pressure from citizens. • Through public governance of the process. Steps: Steps: • Analyse building blocks in terms of energy, comfort and health. For example, segment building stock that will be • Draw up a clear definition of a zero energy district. renovated by use, performance level, etc. • Conduct analysis of the building stock and case studies. • Define the comfort objectives of the buildings to be • Analyse key indicators for mobility and buildings to renovated. Different models give equal comfort with include the flexibility of the building envelope. different energy requirements, so this is a way to • Test, monitor and report based on clear indicators. moderate energy needs. • Consider and include the following parameters in any • Communicate the benefits and train stakeholders on plan: the key indicators in terms of mobility (including objective tools for retrofits. active mobility potentiality); the energy needs of the • Enable easier access to financing. buildings; the quality of the envelope; the flexibility of • Develop techniques, contracts and financing tools that the building envelope to accept and demand energy; are replicable across a district and in other districts. and measures to integrate renewables that are Some techniques for insulating buildings are easier to variable. replicate than others. How to get the snowball effect: How to get the snowball effect: • Reports should show the achievement of key indicators • Provide one-stop shops where citizens and companies targeted. can obtain clear information on the retrofit process. • Through replicability. • Standardise training and communication on the retrofit • Via a survey or direct testimony by citizens. process (e.g. via labelling of the trained workforce). • With the involvement of networks of cities and civil • Use large-scale pilots of deep retrofits to public society organisations. housing as an example to mobilise the private sector. Risks/preconditions: Risks/preconditions: • There may be insufficient data and analysis where the • Incentives are not connected to measurable results. objectives are not clear. • The rebound effect (i.e. users may consume more • Strong incumbent actors may have an influence on energy if efficiency measures bring costs down). promotion of specific solutions. • After retrofitting the envelope, a building’s heating and • A shared vision is a precondition, as is a positive cooling systems may be oversized. regulatory environment at national, European and local level. Indicators: Indicators: • The number of high-quality deep renovations. • The number of trained stakeholders (public authorities, • Potentially, indicators used in the regulation or officials and workers). investment decisions. • The amount of private investment mobilised in the long term. • Measure results compared to the indicators.

39 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Capacity building for local and regional authorities.

Key activity:

Supporting implementation of sustainable action plans, with a focus on small municipalities and regions where this is lacking.

Stakeholders:

• Small regional/local authorities and agencies, local supply chain actors and civil society (to obtain support for implementation of sustainable energy action plans - SEAPs).

How to mobilise them:

• Develop and implement a local strategy (SEAP) to help generate public support and allow supply chain actors to see the local market potential. • Use replicators through networks of cities and regions. Regions can act as aggregators and communication facilitators with smaller municipalities. Aggregation can also take place at sub-regional level. • Enable civil society to co-create the steps for implementing SEAPs.

Steps:

• Analyse the barriers to implementation, or use existing studies available from the Covenant of Mayors and projects, and map out the financing needs and actions for implementation. Small municipalities may need to prioritise SEAP actions if they lack the capacity to address them all. • Show the full chain of each SEAP action: starting from what a public building contains, what will be renovated, how much will be saved, what is the value chain behind this, how much finance is needed and where to obtain it. • MRV (measuring, reporting and verification) is important and can be very different for large municipalities than for smaller ones. A project could set up an MRV scheme, for example, to help with implementation for three years. • Visibility is important for mayors and politicians, something which is easier in a local municipality. A local municipality must also ensure sustainability over time. • Ensure multi-level governance information exchange. This could be achieved through a requirement to use the national authority/agency and regional agency to exchange information.

How to get the snowball effect:

• Provide a one-on-one support service (e.g. a help desk). • Facilitate peer-to-peer learning. • Aggregate projects or develop common framework conditions for aggregating several small municipalities at inter-communal or regional level.

Risks/preconditions:

• For regions and cities, there must be complementarity with the Covenant of Mayors and the EU City Facility project should be upscaled. • Identify the small municipalities which require or have the capacity to take action.

Indicators:

• The number of actions implemented. • The amount of small municipalities involved. • The number of politicians who declare that continuation of actions will be ensured after the second or third year. • Potentially, the number of applications for funding.

40 Challenge: Challenge: Identify financial instruments Identify financial instruments for mobilising private investments. for mobilising private investments.

Key activity: Key activity:

Supporting the creation of new financial instruments to de- Supporting replication of particular financial instruments, risk investment in sustainable energy. specifically green bonds.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders:

• Financial institutions, including banks and specialist • Small investors and the Climate Bonds Initiative1. guarantee institutions, potential investors, and EU financial institutions (including the European How to mobilise them: Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development). • Provide hard facts on the financial returns and demonstrate results. How to mobilise them: • Use the appeal of environmental responsibility.

• Create platforms to bring project promoters and Steps: financers together. • Hold a series of roundtables to broker financing between • Carry out research to understand success factors. project developers and financiers. • Conduct market testing to see where instruments could be applied. Steps: • Adapt instruments to markets via financial engineering. • Work on awareness raising. • Use the following set of steps (encompassing ‘plan, do, • Support deployment. review’ with a feedback loop): • Carry out impact analyses. • Understand and segment the market. • Mobilise stakeholders through platforms and How to get the snowball effect: roundtables. • Use project development assistance, capacity • The complete process will build a snowball effect. building and validation. • Promote the financial instruments. • Establish tailor-made financial instruments. • Invite applications to the financial instruments and Risks/preconditions: build capacity/provide technical assistance. • Monitor and evaluate the use, performance and • An instrument that works successfully in one country outcomes, leading to an impact evaluation. may not do so in another (due to differing financial regulations, banks’ modes of operation, etc). How to get the snowball effect: • Financial frameworks and the overall requirements may be completely different. • Promote early results. • Instruments must be clearly defined as green – to • Replicate in other Member States. avoid reputational risks. • Follow up with project developers in depth; retain their interest to build momentum. Indicators: • Develop an investor network for the end-user community. • The number and size of funds established. • The number of projects adopted and the leverage ratio. Risks/preconditions: • The additional capacity created in terms of renewables produced and energy savings. • Creating new financial instruments may be expensive • The number of stakeholders engaged. and contractually difficult. EU regulations make it difficult to establish certain types of financial instrument. 1. https://www.climatebonds.net/ • Market failures and the technology-readiness level of supported solutions must be clear. • Co-creation is a necessary precondition.

Indicators:

• The number and size of funds established. • The number of projects applying and the leverage ratio. • The additional capacity created in terms of renewables produced and energy savings. • The number of stakeholders engaged.

41 Worksheets of key activities explored

Challenge: Challenge: Engage consumers, including citizens, Engage consumers, including citizens, as active players in the clean energy transition. as active players in the clean energy transition.

Key activity: Key activity:

Encouraging market uptake for renewable energy Developing business models to support private home energy communities and local energy cooperatives. For instance, retrofits. through sharing best practices. Stakeholders: Stakeholders: • Structural funds, energy communities, building owners • Local authorities, citizens, civil society, energy agencies and co-owners associations. and SMEs. How to mobilise them: How to mobilise them: • Through energy efficiency projects. • Through communication, community building and • Combine renewables and energy efficiency as they capacity building. work best together. • Be mindful of social determinants (i.e. the social Steps: makeup of collective buildings) to ensure inclusion of different types of tenants. • Map the actors involved. • Achieve a balance of sustainability: review Steps: the sustainability in terms of the benefits and responsibilities, taking sustainability criteria into • Build a community/collective of building tenants before account as well as financial criteria. proceeding to a project’s technical set-up, ensuring a • Provide technical assistance. co-creation process. • Provide business and monitoring support. Small • Consider the full range of benefits, not only in terms of organisations need help understanding how to do this. CO2 but also comfort and living space. • Revolving funds, toolkits and network support are most • Provide specific grant advantages, perhaps by linking efficient for bringing new energy communities forward. grants to community building or specific maturity • A feedback loop is important in terms of rebuilding and levels. inspiring new examples. The more examples, the more • Establish a revolving fund. will follow. • Provide technical support. • Ensure a feedback loop. How to get the snowball effect: How to get the snowball effect: • The feedback loop will contribute to the snowball effect. • Community building is important to ensure a snowball Risks/preconditions: effect. Member States have tools to carry out large retrofits and to provide solutions for retrofits, but are • Diversity criteria or the maturity of the community: how often blocked by a lack of community building or a lack to assess the readiness level of the community to take of collective decision-making. on services. Risks/preconditions: Indicators: • A lack of visibility on funding. Although a great deal • Traditional indicators, such as local renewables of funding is available, it is difficult for citizens and community actors to find and identify. penetration and CO2 savings. • The percentage of the local population involved. • A lack of funding for community building.

Indicators:

• Whether the desired level of renovation is being achieved.

42 Challenge: Activate a locally driven energy transition.

Key activity:

Creating new agents of change for the clean energy transition.

Stakeholders:

• Agents of change may include politicians, members of administrations, agencies or businesses.

How to mobilise them:

• There must be clear and relevant benefits for a mayor, local business or citizens’ organisation to become an agent of change. These may not be the obvious environmental, climate and energy benefits, but could include creation of employment locally, creation of business for the local community, winning more votes, etc. • Through benchmarking. • By raising awareness about the urgency of the transition. • Develop a platform for agents of change. • Engage existing local and regional energy agencies or create new ones.

Steps:

• Map stakeholders at the beginning of the process. Identify reluctant parties early on and try to draw them into the process. • Local and regional energy agencies which can act as agents of change are not present everywhere. Establishing more agencies and empowering existing ones could be useful, perhaps through a mandatory requirement for local and regional energy agencies.

How to get the snowball effect:

• Agents of change must recognise that they have to go outside their communities and convince other potential agents of change. Ideally, other mayors for a mayor, other businesses for a business etc. They should be the ones helping to create a new vision for the community. • Emphasise the opportunities and create new visions.

Risks/preconditions:

• Risks exist around changes in policy, quality assurance of a scheme, and inactivity of change agents.

Indicators:

• The number of people reached and trained. • The projects or investments prepared or triggered.

43 Keynote speech View from the EEA: LIFE as a lab for improving

Paul McAleavey implementation Head of Coordination and Strategy, European Environment Agency (EEA)

A huge amount of ideas have already come out of this event. I’ve • A third is fostering innovation. Diverse forms of innovation noted down at least 150. are needed. Again, there must be a focus on solutions. We have become very good at describing problems, but we need to be- The EEA is not presently directly involved in implementation of LIFE, come better at identifying and sharing solutions. LIFE has a but we have an important role working with the European Com- very important role to play here. mission, the European Parliament and with countries themselves in helping to frame some of the challenges. We also have a very • The fourth heading is upscaling. When it comes to scaling important role when it comes to implementation. up what works, LIFE is part of the answer. It can be situated between Horizon Europe and the Structural Funds. In future, State of the Environment 2020 there is also the creative access to sustainable finance actions through the private sector. Every five years the EEA, working with 39 countries and around 3 000 experts across the European continent, produces a report on the • The final point is a just transition - making sure no one is left state of Europe’s environment. We state where progress has been behind. LIFE has a very important part to play here, too. made in the past five to 10 years and look at the prognosis - what the forecasts are for the future and where we foresee major challenges. One thing missing from the discussion so far which must be addressed is the role of young people. If I was to add one thing to the This is an integrated report, looking across around 35 different 150 ideas we’ve already heard, I would mention young people as a themes. The next publication2 in December 2019 is timed to co- particular target audience. incide with the new Commission coming into office and to support discussions on the Green Deal which we hope to help frame. The importance of implementation

There is a sense of urgency, especially when it comes to climate One role we have as an agency and a network across 39 countries change. Also around oceans, biodiversity and ecosystems. Our in Europe is to help in framing challenges. The other is to help with report will show that much has been done in Europe, but that implementation, something which is absolutely key. The new publi- more is needed. cation is our sixth State of the Environment report. In the previous five, we have emphasised the benefits of implementing what has The concluding chapter asks where Europe goes from here. been agreed at European and national level. Five headings from that chapter are linked to the discussions at this conference: From environmental implementation reviews over recent years, we see many needs when it comes to capacity building and expertise, • One is strengthening policy implementation, integration including among public authorities. Sometimes different groupings and coherence. Throughout the feedback sessions there has of countries have different needs. For example, the Nordic countries been much talk about mainstreaming. There will be much talk might have different perspectives to the western Balkan countries. about policy coherence and the need for integration. In the new As an agency we are trying to focus more on this in future, looking financial period, LIFE has an incredibly important role to play at what the specific needs are in different parts of Europe. in helping to deliver around implementation, integration and coherence. In this context, we think LIFE can be a laboratory for improving implementation. • A second headline is the need for more systemic and long- term frameworks and binding targets. Several times we have heard people ask ‘how do you work through the systemic challenges?’. This requires us to address in a more systemic way the key challenges we are facing in Europe. 2. https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/soer2020-europes-environment-state-and-outlook-report

44 Second moderated panel discussion

The members of the panel were: Vincent Berruto, Head of Unit, Horizon 2020 Energy, EASME; Maja Mikosinska, Head of Sector Nature and Biodiversity, LIFE programme, EASME.

the energy consumption of fridges does bilise large investments in energy effi- Energy experience from not exceed the amount listed on the en- ciency, something that has gained great Horizon 2020 ergy label. Also projects which empower importance in recent years. Many have local actors, such as by helping local and worked on defining and testing new, inno- The focus of the second panel discussion regional authorities to define and imple- vative financing schemes to attract private was success stories from LIFE and Horizon ment sustainable energy and climate ac- capital. Parts of the building sector can 2020, the programme currently supporting tion plans,” Mr Berruto said. be challenging, such as multi-residential energy projects. Vincent Berruto, Head buildings, he pointed out. It is very compli- of Unit, Horizon 2020 Energy, EASME, said Secondly, projects which build capacity. cated to achieve energy efficiency in these Horizon 2020 has plenty of success sto- “We have a lot of experience in raising the buildings, due to multiple private owners. ries: “Today, we have just over 200 energy skills of different market actors,” he com- Some projects have set up structures to projects supported by the Horizon 2020 mented. For instance, there are 70 projects help renovate this sort of building. programme. They cover the whole inno- addressing a lack of energy skills in the vation chain from research to retail. The building sector, with a series of projects Mr Berruto considered that the best pro- majority – two-thirds – are aimed at im- to train the workforce in the framework of jects supported within Horizon 2020 and proving market conditions and addressing the build-up skills initiative, including other its predecessor Intelligent Energy Europe market failures. These will continue after industry professionals such as architects. had some key aspects in common: very 2020 in the LIFE programme.” This has had a tremendous impact on the clear, smart objectives responding to mar- market in all Member States, according to ket needs and in line with EU energy policy, Several types of successful project were Mr Berruto. in particular the targets on energy efficien- highlighted. Firstly, those supporting policy and renewable energy. They were also cy implementation. “For example, checking Lastly, there are projects which help mo- highly impact-oriented, with sustainable

45 results. The best projects ensured that im- sinska. “We estimate that, with just the encourages stakeholder engagement and pacts would continue after their lifetime projects contracted between 2014 and is ready to support any kind of partnership and had strong replication strategies. Oth- 2016, waste across the EU was reduced necessary for the environment and cli- er key ingredients mentioned were proper by almost 1 million tonnes per year thanks mate action.” financial management and a good group to appropriate management. This is more of partners. A variety of competencies and than the total municipal waste of Latvia In addition, some of the most successful skills within a team is often highly effec- in 2017.” projects are those that convince others tive, he concluded. to adopt their solutions to a similar envi- In climate action, there are projects direct- ronmental problem or to share an inno- ly supporting the priority area of climate vative solution. LIFE: change adaptation, as well as supporting EU efforts on mitigation and climate gov- Ms Mikosinska explained how LIFE a success story ernance. A small number of those projects achieves its success, while having one of are working on energy efficiency which is the smallest error rates: “The recovery of Maja Mikosinska, Head of Sector Nature expected to result in a reduction of energy financing is very low because we assist and Biodiversity, LIFE programme, EASME, consumption of 180 million kWh per year. projects though monitoring. That brings described how over 27 years LIFE has sup- “These are impressive results, comparable some administration but we are trying to ported more than 5 000 projects for the to the average consumption of 34 000 simplify the process to maintain balance.” benefit of the European environment, na- houses. LIFE is something we can all be ture and biodiversity, and supporting EU proud of,” Ms Mikosinska said. efforts on climate action. She considered that the programme’s In the area of nature and biodiversity, for committed and dedicated beneficiaries are example, the EU has assisted Member the most important ingredients for a suc- States in their efforts to designate the cessful project, adding, “Without them, we Natura 2000 network. An estimated 20% couldn’t achieve such impressive results.” of all Natura 2000 sites are targeted by at least one LIFE project. LIFE has also Stakeholder engagement is also key: ben- made a difference for species, support- eficiaries often tackle very difficult chal- ing initiatives for improving their conser- lenges they cannot address alone. Ms vation status. Mikosinska gave examples of a wide range of stakeholders: “We have pro- “In addition, we have a large portfolio of jects working with divers, travel agencies, projects working on waste prevention, schools, hospitals and fishermen. The reduction and recycling,” said Ms Miko- beauty of the LIFE programme is that it © Mara Callaert

Gilles Gantelet Director for Policy, Coordination, LIFE Governance and Resources, DG ENV

In his keynote speech, Paul McAleavey from the EEA described how A simple but important factor was the good interaction between more than 150 ideas have come out of this event, but in fact there the LIFE sub-programmes. This conference has also shown that the are even more. Participants have already started to streamline and clean energy sub-programme, part of the proposal for the new LIFE look at ways of implementing these ideas to make them a reality. programme, already works.

This conference has been very fruitful and engaging, with people The information gathered from this event and a public consulta- willing to take part and co-create. Our aim was to have substan- tion in early 2020 will be used to define the multiannual work pro- tial, high quality participation and this has been achieved. Another gramme (MAWP) for 2021-2024. We will try to ensure the MAWP accomplishment is the cooperation between people from very dif- is adopted by the end of 2020. Engaging more with the different ferent horizons, such as associations, companies and NGOs, and countries’ representatives who are responsible for this will help to different sectors, from farmers to industry. make the process smoother. There is still much work to be done but we will use all our creativity to succeed. This shows there is a community that really cares about LIFE. A community that does not just want to submit proposals and carry out projects, but one that wants to share the programme, which is very encouraging.

The results of this event will help us to define the future of LIFE - where we want to go and how we will achieve it.

The way forward

We can already highlight two important messages. The first is the need to involve citizens. LIFE cannot operate in a bubble. For the clean energy transition, we have to involve citizens as active play- Future LIFE programme timeline ers. We must empower people in nature and biodiversity. For the circular economy, there was a huge focus on consumption and food Conference (November 2019) waste, and in climate action on the active participation of citizens in the co-creation process. This is a new strategy for LIFE - to have a Public consultation (January-February 2020) process which is much more bottom-up than in the past. Draft MAWP consultations of LIFE Committee (Spring 2020) The second is the social transition. We must leave no one behind. Talk must be accompanied by action, which is not easy. But with- Adoption of MAWP for 2021-2024 (Autumn 2020) out this, we see resistance to treaties for fighting climate change and protecting biodiversity in a number of countries. The new LIFE programme must emphasise this - for the ecological, energy and Start of implementation (January 2021) climate transition.

51 NOTES

KH-02-20-093-EN-N