Mainstreaming the compilation process of the EPEA / testing the ReMEA tables

Transcription

1 Mainstreaming the compilation process of the EPEA / testing the ReMEA tables Final report on pilot study Eurostat, Grant 2016 Project and report commissioned by the European Union Project of Directorate E, Eurostat, European Commission, Grant Agreement Number Wai King Meijer Cheung Sjoerd Schenau Marcel van Velzen

2 CBS Den Haag Henri Faasdreef JP The Hague P.O. Box HA The Hague project number Department of National accounts / environmental statistics 19 december 2016

3 Index 1. Introduction 4 2. Allocation of transfers from the ROW to support EP/RM activity Introduction and objectives Structure of EU-funding EU funding in the Netherlands Financial Transparency System (FTS) as auxiliary data Agriculture and fisheries funding Conclusions Testing the tables for ReMEA Introduction Scope and tables of the ReMEA Compiling data for the ReMEA tables Conclusions and recommendations Mainstreaming the compilation process for EPE References Annexes Annex 1 Eurostat questions related to EPE Annex 2: DG Energy FTS Annex 3: EU-subisides agriculture Annex 4: European Fishery Fund ( ) Annex 5: Fisheries - Operational programme Annex 6: EMFF contribution CEPA/ReMEA 3

4 1. Introduction Environmental protection expenditure accounts (EPEA) present data on the expenditure for environmental protection in a way that is fully compatible with the data reported under ESA, i.e. the economic resources devoted by resident units to environmental protection. The accounts allow compiling the national expenditure for environmental protection (EP) which is defined as the sum of uses of EP services by resident units, gross capital formation for EP activities, and transfers for EP which are not a counterpart of previous items, less financing by the rest of the world. EPEA are part of the SEEA Central Framework (UN et al. 2014), which was adapted as an international statistical standard. In 2017 the EPEA are one of the three modules that will be implemented in all EU countries as a result of the extension of Regulation 691/2011 on European environmental economic accounts. The ReMEA (Resource management expenditure accounts) are not yet part of the legal base, but have been identified in the ESEA as an area of further development. Statistics Netherlands has done several grant projects over the last years to set up the EPE accounts for the Netherlands in order to fulfil the legal obligation in 2017 (Statistics Netherlands, 2014a, 2014b, 2016). The objective of this grant project is a) to further mainstream the compilation process of the EPE tables in order to make the final preparation for the requirements of the EU legal base with the EPE-questionnaire, and b) compiling the ReMEA tables as far as possible. This project consists of three separate elements: a) Allocating transfers from the ROW (EU-Funds) to support EP/RM activity within the country, to sector (ESA2010) and to CEPA or CReMA. b) Testing the tables for ReMEA (Resource management expenditure accounts) c) Mainstreaming the compilation process for EPE and populating the EPE questionnaire with data CEPA/ReMEA 4

5 2. Allocation of transfers from the ROW to support EP/RM activity 2.1 Introduction and objectives Total environmental protection related transfers from the rest of the world (ROW) is a data entry that is required in the obligatory part of the EPE questionnaire. Although in previous research Statistics Netherlands had identified and found some numbers for transfers that stem from the ROW, we had not been able yet to further allocate these transfers from the ROW (European Union (EU)-Funds) that partly aim to support EP/RM activity at the national level. The objective of this study is to further allocate these substantial transfers to receiving sector (ESA2010) and, if sufficient information can be found, to CEPA and/or CReMA categories. Particularly the transfers that relate to agriculture and nature need further analysis / research. These are expected to be substantial in size. The shares of incoming transfers for EP/RM should be estimated for that purpose. This part of the grant proposal is a feasibility study as beforehand it was not known whether the data were available. This study was conducted for the year Structure of EU-funding The European Commission is responsible for the EU budget and as about 80 percent of EU funding is managed at country level, national governments are also responsible for conducting checks and audits. The European Commission manages the budget through directorates-generals and executive agencies. Member countries manage the EU funding mainly through ministries or other public bodies (European Union, 2016a). The European Commission is divided into 33 Directorate-Generals (DGs) (European Union, 2016b). We have identified 8 DGs where most probably environmental related funding can be awarded, based on the fields and funding programs of these DGs. These DGs are: Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) Climate Action (CLIMA) Energy (ENER) Environment (ENV) Joint Research Centre (JRC) Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MARE) Regional and urban Policy (REGIO) Research and Innovation (RTD) The EU agencies are distinct from the EU institutions. They perform specific tasks under EU law (European Union, 2016c). An example of an executive agency related to the environmental theme is the European Environmental Agency in Denmark. In the Netherlands there are no relevant executive agencies related the environment located. CEPA/ReMEA 5

6 2.3 EU funding in the Netherlands In the Netherlands the EU funding is awarded to companies, non-profit organisations and governmental organisations. The funding is awarded via national government, decentralised agencies or directly from the European commission. Data source for EU funding The European Commission has budget data available for the European Union per member country from the years 2007 to 2014 on the website: d_expenditure_en.xls As all EU funding is ultimately awarded by the European Commission, this source can be qualified as of the best data source available to retrieve information on the environmental funding received by the Netherlands from the European Union. First, all relevant categories related to environmental themes were identified. The two main categories are: 1) Sustainable growth 2) Preservation and management of natural resources Next, the most likely sub-categories which could contain environmental funding were identified. In table 1 these sub-categories are marked with an x (in the last column). CEPA/ReMEA 6

7 2.3.1 European Commission, expenditure Netherlands NL (EUR million) 2013 Possibly Environment related 1 SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 1.054, Competitiveness for growth and employment 659, Seventh Research framework programme (incl.compl.of sixth Research FP) 560,3 X Decommissioning (Direct research) Ten 5, Galileo 1, Marco Polo 4,9 X Lifelong Learning 43, Competitiveness and innovation framework programme (CIP) 28, CIP Entrepreneurship and innovation 10, CIP ICT policy support 12, CIP Intelligent energy 6,3 X Social policy agenda 5, Customs 2013 and Fiscalis , Nuclear decommissioning European Global Adjustment Funds - X Energy projects to aid economic recovery 1,6 1.1.DAG Decentralised agencies - X 1.1.OTH Other actions and programmes 7,7 X 1.2 Cohesion for growth and employment 394, Structural funds 393,8 X Convergence objective Regional competitiveness and employment objective 379, European territorial cooperation objective 11, Technical assistance 2, Cohesion Fund 0,3 X 1.2.DAG Decentralised agencies OTH Other actions and programmes 0 2 PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 954, Market related expenditure and direct aids 828, Agriculture markets 821,4 X Direct Aid 775,8 Export refunds 2 Storage 2,8 Other 40, Fisheries market 0,3 X Animal and plant health 7 /x Rural development 99, European fisheries fund 6, Fisheries governance and international agreements Life+ 15,9 X 2.0.DAG Decentralised agencies - X 2.0.OTH Other actions and programmes 0,9 X Source: European Union, 2016 Of the marked subcategories, only Life+ can be directly (and entirely) identified as environmental related funding. Life+ is the Financial Instrument for the Environmental Regulation (Life, 2016). In 2013 the amount of Life+ is 15.9 million euros (see table 2.3.1). For the rest of the marked subcategories more information is needed to identify the relevant share connected to the environment. When all amounts of all marked subcategories are summarised in table 3, the total is 1.8 billion euros. The range of the EU funding to support EP/RM activity in the Netherlands is therefore between the baseline of Life million and the total of all marked subcategories 1.8 billion euros. CEPA/ReMEA 7

8 2.4 Financial Transparency System (FTS) as auxiliary data As the level of the European commission expenditure data is not detailed enough to determine the relevant environmental related funding, auxiliary information is needed. One possible source is budget data of the DG s. This can be found in the Financial Transparency System (FTS) of the European commission. Website: Committed amount, not paid out amount In FTS the data of the DGs reported are committed amounts and not the paid out amounts as in the expenditure report. In addition, the FTS reports only on the funding managed by Commission s departments and do not cover for example agriculture and rural subsidies managed by national governments (see also annex 1). Accordingly, the data cannot be directly compared. Funding type Another issue is the funding type. Which funding types fall under the definition of European subsidies (i.e. current and capital transfers in the EPE questionnaire)? Are all funding types included, such as grants, prices, public procurement, financial instruments, budget support and external experts or only the grants? For example, when we looked at all funding type for LIFE+ for DG environment in table 2.4.1, the amount for all funding type is 21.1 million euros and only for grants this is 17.6 million euros. According to Eurostat (personal communication) only the grants should be considered (see annex 1). Table : DG Environment, 2013 FUNDING ALL Program Number of commitments Total amount (Euro) Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme ,50 LIFE+: Financial Instrument for the Environment ,88 Pilot project ,00 07 Environment ,75 Integrated Maritime Policy , ,13 FUNDING GRANTS Program Number of commitments Total amount (Euro) Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme ,00 LIFE+: Financial Instrument for the Environment ,00 Pilot project ,00 Source: European commission, FTS ,00 Assumption paid out in t+2 years FTS only reports on the committed amounts. An assumption has to be made about the paid out period, before FTS can be used as auxiliary data. We have made the assumption that the paid out period of the committed amounts is in + 2 years and that all paid out is in one year. Accordingly, the FTS of 2011 is used as auxiliary data for the expenditure of In the European commission expenditure of 2013 the amount of The Seventh Research framework programme (incl.compl.of sixth Research FP) is million euros (see table 2.3.1). The search result in FTS, for 2011 for the Seventh CEPA/ReMEA 8

9 Research framework program includes the following departments and amounts (table 2.4.2): Table 2.4.2: Seventh Research framework program Department Number of commitments Total amount (Eur Directorate-General for Energy ,90 Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry ,42 European Research Council Executive Agency ,13 Directorate-General for the Information Society and Media ,47 Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport ,00 Research Executive Agency ,34 Directorate-General for Research and Innovation ,33 Source: FTS Earlier, we have identified the most likely DGs for environmental related funding. Of these DGs in table there are DG energy and DG research and innovation. The total of these two DGs is 1485 billion euros. With both DGs the beneficiaries of the grants have to be analysed one by one. For DG Energy these are 7 grants and for DG research and innovation these are 349 grants. Also an assumption has to be made about grants which are a collaborating project of several countries, what the paid out amount is per country. This information is also not available in the FTS. Therefore we have made the assumption that each participant received the same amount of funding. For DG energy this method has been applied for the breakdown and the result is an amount of 5.1 million euros (see annex 2). For DG research and innovation this breakdown is much more difficult as this implies analysing 349 grants on amount, sector and CEPA/CREMA. Issues with using FTS as auxiliary data: - Some DGs have a lot of recipients (for example 349 recipients for DG Research and innovation). Each grant has to be analysed individually to identify 1) the category of expenditure account, for example: a seventh research framework programme and 2) whether it is EPEA related (or not). This is a lot of work and will take a lot of time. - Assumptions have to be made about the paid out period. The paid out period is not known, only the committed period is shown on FTS. The assumption is therefore made that paid out is t+2 year from committed year. And also that the paid out amount is assumed to be in one year, where often this is divided over multiple years. - Assumptions have to be made about the amount paid. The amount paid out to each country in a collaborating project cannot be found in the FTS. Therefore the assumption has been made that each country receives the same amount of funding. - This elaborate analysis has to be conducted for each year for (nearly) all relevant expenditure categories, as committing grants have not fixed structures. CEPA/ReMEA 9

10 2.5 Agriculture and fisheries funding Different amounts are reported by European commission and by Dutch national government for agriculture related to the funding of agriculture and fisheries. The amount committed for agriculture funding in 2013 in the European commission expenditure is million euros. In the Dutch report of EU-subsidies agriculture en and fisheries of Department of Economics (Ministerie van Economische zaken) this amount is 823 million euros. This issue has also been consulted with Eurostat (see also annex 1). The answer of Eurostat on this matter is: One possible reason in the case of agriculture funding could be the reference period (October to October and not fiscal year); other reasons could be the control and clearance systems as well as the lag time between payments by national paying agency and reimbursements by Commission to the Member States (in the case of the EAGF on a monthly basis and in the case of EAFRD on a quarterly basis). In the reports of the department of economics the EU fund for agriculture is 40.9 million euros (see table and also annex 3): Table 2.5.1: Environmental related agriculture and rural EU funding Agriculture Specific environmental support Rural development Increasing quality of environment and landscapes Total Source: Ministerie van Economische zaken These figures are in the amount granted and not amount paid out. For the years 2014 and 2015 the EU-funds for agriculture and fisheries has been made public. The database is: Fisheries European support for fisheries for the Netherlands is provided by The European fisheries fund (EFF). The EFF has five priority areas (axes) for funding and axes 4 is sustainable development of fisheries areas (e.g. to support diversification of the local economy). For the period the total EU EFF amount to the Netherlands is 48.6 million (see annex 4). For 2013 we have estimated the amount for sustainable development of fisheries as euros, based on the figures in annex 5. This amount exceeds the expenditure amount of 0.3 million euros. The main reason for this difference is that this is the committed amount and not the paid out amount. Therefore the amount of 2011 is estimated as well (see also annex 5) with the paid-out in +2 year assumption. The result is the amount of euros. This amount also exceeds the 0.3 million euros. This committed amount is most probably paid out over multiple years. CEPA/ReMEA 10

11 Fisheries The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) is specifically tailored to Europe's seas and coasts. For the period the EMFF contribution to the Dutch Sustainable fisheries will be 36.2 million euros (see annex 6). Based on this amount divided by the amount of years, the average amount per year for this period is estimated as 2.1 million euros. 2.6 Conclusions The EU-funding for the Netherlands related to environmental protection is included in the European expenditure accounts. However, these amounts are mostly included in categories with other non-environmental subjects. As no breakdowns of these amounts are provided, auxiliary data is needed to estimate the EPA funding for each category. Information on EU funding by DG in the FTS can be used as auxiliary data to make the breakdown to EPEA funding. To use this FTS source assumptions have to be made, which most probably will affect the quality of the results. Assumptions have to be made about the paid-out time as only committed amount are shown in FTS. Also no information is provided on the paid-out period; assumptions on this matter are also needed. Furthermore, in funding projects collaborated by multiple partners/countries, no information is provided of amount per partner/country, and therefore on the amount per partner/countries assumptions have to be made as well. In the FTS detailed information can be retrieved per grant, but retrieving information on this matter can be very difficult as this has to be done by analysing the list of grants one by one, per expenditure category, per DG. For some categories like the seventh framework, this means going through a list of around four hundred grants(!). Not only retrieving the amount of EP funding is difficult, also the breakdown to sectors and CEPA/CREMA means retrieving this from the list of grants, by analysing the list of grants one by one, per expenditure category, per DG. For the categories LIFE+, Agriculture and Fishery obtaining the total EP related funding is relatively easy. All LIFE+ projects are environmental related and therefore the whole amount can be indicated as EP related transfers. To break down the LIFE+ amount to sector and CEPA and CREMA, auxiliary sources like FTS are needed. Thereby the same issues, as mentioned above about the FTS, apply for this category as well. Agriculture and fisheries data are reported by the Dutch Department of economics. This information can be found consolidated by environmental related topics, making the retrieval of this data rather straightforward. Also the further breakdown to sector and CEPA and CREMA is possible, as information on the environmental related topics are provided. CEPA/ReMEA 11

12 NL (EUR million) 2013 EPEA 2013 CEPA CREMA Seventh Research framework programme (incl.compl.of sixth Research FP) 560,3 FTS FTS FTS Marco Polo 4,9 FTS FTS FTS CIP Intelligent energy 6,3 FTS FTS FTS European Global Adjustment Funds DAG Decentralised agencies Structural funds 393,8 FTS FTS FTS Cohesion Fund 0,3 FTS FTS FTS Agriculture markets Direct Aid 775,8 9,9 9,9 - Export refunds Storage Other 40, Fisheries market 0,3 0,3 0, Animal and plant health 7 FTS FTS FTS Life+ 15,9 15,9 FTS FTS 2.0.DAG Decentralised agencies OTH Other actions and programmes 0,9 FTS FTS FTS Totaal 1806,4 57,1 41,2 0 CEPA/ReMEA 12

13 3. Testing the tables for ReMEA 3.1 Introduction The Resource Management Expenditure Accounts (ReMEA) comprise accounts encompassing the production of resource management specific services, the supply and use of resource management specific services, national expenditure on resource management, and the financing of national expenditure on resource management (UN et al, 2014). ReMEA s main objective is to assess the economic resources a nation devotes to resource management, providing indicators of society's spending for preserving the stock of natural resources and fighting against depletion. Eurostat has developed the methodology and tables for ReMEA and published guidelines for implementation (Eurostat, 2014). Over the last years Statistics Netherlands has put significant efforts in setting up and improving its environmental activity accounts (with the help of Eurostat grants). Several grant projects were done over the last years to set up the EPE accounts for the Netherlands in order to fulfil the legal obligation in In 2013 and 2014 a short time series was compiled for the main variables of the EPE questionnaire and some remaining issues were resolved (see CBS, 2014a). In 2014 also a study was done to improve the data on EPE from the central government to improve and extend the COFOG data also in the area of resource management (CBS, 2014b). Accordingly, a significant part of the data required for the ReMEA tables is available. In the beginning of 2016 a study was published that investigated the setup and possible implementation of integrated framework for monetary environmental activity accounts, which included both environmental protection and resource management expenditure (Statistics Netherlands, 2016). In this part of the project, we have applied the simplified framework for data collection as described in chapter 3 of the ReMEA guidelines. As recommended in the guidelines, we have focused on the output and expenditure of characteristic RM products, including the GFCF of RM characteristic activities. The main objective of this study was to fill the proposed tables for ReMEA for 2013 and 2014 based on data that is currently available and to identify where data gaps still exists. 3.2 Scope and tables of the ReMEA RM activities are those activities whose primary purpose is the preservation, maintenance and enhancement of the stock of natural resources and hence safeguarding against depletion. These activities include reducing the withdrawals of natural resources (such as the recovery, reuse, recycling and substitution of natural resources), restoring natural resource stocks (increases or recharges of natural resource stocks), the general management of natural resources (including monitoring, control, surveillance and data collection) and the production of goods and services used to manage or conserve natural resources. (Eurostat, 2014). RM activities can be classified according to the CReMA classification (which is part of the CEA classification). The CReMA was developed within the European Statistical System for compiling statistics on the Environmental Goods and Services Sector (EGSS). The CReMA classes are as follows: CEPA/ReMEA 13

14 CReMA 10 Management of water CReMA 11 Management of forest resources CReMA 12 Management of wild flora and fauna CReMA 13 Management of energy resources CReMA 13A Production of energy from renewable resources CReMA 13B Heat/energy saving and management CReMA 13C Minimisation of the use of fossil energy as raw materials CReMA 14 Management of minerals CReMA 15 Research and development activities for resource management CReMA 16 Other resource management activities Defining the scope of resource management requires identifying (see Eurostat guidelines): The activities characteristic for the field of resource management. These are activities whose main purpose is resource management. They are called characteristic activities. Thus RM characteristic products are the result of activities whose purpose is resource management; The non-characteristic activities for the field of resource management. Products whose uses are interesting because they are clearly covered by the concept of expenditure for resource management (i.e. whose use serves an RM purpose) without being typical (i.e. without being the result of an activity whose purpose is RM, in other words they are neither characteristic products nor do they constitute characteristic activities). These are connected and resource efficient products; The ReMEA describes the uses of connected and resource efficient products by resident units, as well as certain specific transfers related to them. It does not describe their production (i.e. in tables 1-3 in ReMEA questionnaire) as in the case of environmental goods and services sector (EGSS) statistics. For the ReMEA, the main adaptation compared to the EPEA is the inclusion of both the production of goods as well as services as characteristic activities. For EPEA only services are included. Accordingly, so called connected and resource efficient products are out of scope as these are neither characteristic products nor do constitute the output of characteristic activities. The ReMEA tables The simplified ReMEA tables consists of seven tables: (1) general government, (2) corporations: ancillary production, (3) corporations as market producers, (4) total supply of resource management products, (5) households, (6) RM Transfers and (7) total economy. This is the same setup as the reporting tables for EPEA. Table 1 reports the production of RM services by government. Producing RM products for the use by others will be the main activity of market producers (both principal and CEPA/ReMEA 14

15 secondary) which are to be reported in table 3. Table 4 allows for recording intermediate consumption of RM products, import, export, VAT and trade margins of resource management production activities. These variables together with output reported in tables 1 to 3 allows for calculating RM output available for national uses. Table 6 is for reporting current and capital transfers of the different economic sectors financing RM activities. This information allows for calculating the financing of RM expenditure. Tables 7.1 and 7.2 sum up the data reported and are filled in automatically using the data of tables 1 to Compiling data for the ReMEA tables In this section we will describe the data sources and methodology we have used to compile the tables for ReMEA Table 1: Government COFOG data do not provide information to identify and classify RM activities for government. In 2014/2015 statistics Netherlands did a grant project to reclassify the COFOG data for central government to the CEA classification for 2013 using data direct from the central government database (Statistics Netherlands 2014b). In this project not only CEPA but also all CReMA categories were considered. This resulted in a dataset from which the data for ReMEA table 1 can easily be obtained. In 2016, also data for 2014 were compiled for central government. Local government may also conduct RM activities. The Dutch water boards take care of integral water management. These activities can be identified in the COFOG data and be attributed to CReMA10. At this moment it is not possible to identify other RM activities for local government. Particularly municipalities may conduct activities related to CReMA 13 (renewable energy, energy saving). The table below summarises the main results for Table 1 (General government) for 2014: mln euro CReMA10 CReMA11 CReMA12 CReMA13 CReMA14 CReMA15 CReMA16 ( GCF.1 ) Gross capital formation for the production of RM services [P5 + NP] ( Pnep.1 ) Intermediate consumption (excluding RM services) [P2] ( P2ext ) Intermediate consumption of EP services ( D.1 ) Compensation of employees [D1] ( S.1 ) Other taxes less subsidies on production [D29-D39]: belastingen ( S.1 ) Other taxes less subsidies on production [D29-D39]: subsidies ( K.1 ) Consumption of fixed capital [K1] ( O.1 ) RM output [P1] Main observations: CReMA 10 (water) and CReMA 13 (energy) activities generate most RM output. Water quantity management is a key responsibility of the government. In the Netherlands, water boards (in Dutch waterschappen) have two important CEPA/ReMEA 15

16 tasks. First, they are responsible for managing water barriers, waterways, and water levels. For the Netherlands, this is an essential task as a large part of the country is lying at or below sea level. Second, they are responsible for maintenance of surface water quality through wastewater treatment. They manage wastewater treatment plants where all municipal waste water is treated and cleaned. The second task is clearly related to the production of environmental protection services, namely CEPA2 (wastewater treatment). The first task is related to resource management (CReMA10). It may be argued that this task also has the purpose of water safety, i.e. to protect a large part of the Netherlands against flooding. It is impossible to separate these activities into resource management and protection against flooding and therefore it was decided to classify all these activities as resource management. This is consistent with our treatment with the EGSS where the activities have been classified the same. CReMA 11 activities are low. In the Netherlands, government is responsible for the maintenance of a large part of the Dutch forests (Staatsbosbeheer). In government statistics, they are part of central government and also classified in the COFOG statistics. Here however, they are classified as CEPA 6 activities. Accordingly, activities of Staatsbosbeheer are classified as CEPA 6. However, Staatsbosbeheer is also responsible for a large part of our timber production even if it small compared to many other countries). Accordingly, these activities are now missed in the RM activities. Further research is needed to make a correction here. A comparison between 2013 and 2014 data showed some remarkable changes, particularly related to CReMA13. It still needs to be investigated what caused these changes Table 2: Ancillary activities The current Dutch EPE statistics for businesses provide information on environmental investments and environmental costs (capital costs and current costs) for NACE The data are based on an annual survey. The questionnaire comprises questions on the costs incurred by enterprises in the environment domains waste, wastewater, environmental permits, environmental damage, soil decontamination, environmental research, environmental coordination, investments in new environment equipment installed (end-of-pipe and integrated facilities), and plans for environmental provisions coming into operation in the two years following the survey. For the Netherlands, no data is available for ancillary activities for RM activities. We have only information on total investments in energy savings for corporations (CreMA 13). Probably, investments by other corporations in RM for own account activities is low. Investments in renewable energy are also known, but as renewable energy production is a characteristic activity, this GFCF is recorded in table 3. CEPA/ReMEA 16

17 3.3.3 Table 3: Corporations as market producers In this table only the supply of RM products by characteristic activities of corporations has to be recorded. Starting point here is the EGSS data. In the Netherlands we apply the activity approach to compile data for the EGSS (and not the product approach). Accordingly we have data for intermediate consumption, value added and total output for all RM activities and already an allocation to CReMA. Using the EGSS dataset we have identified the following characteristic RM activities: The value added block can be compiled based on data from the SNA. For some environmental activities, like NACE 38.3 recycling, data can be directly be obtained from the generation of income account. For the other EGSS activities key distributions from the generation of income account have to be used for NACE categories where these activities primarily take place. For example, for environmental construction activities, the distribution of the value added block of the installation industry (NACE 432) has been used. Gross fixed capital formation data is available for CReMA 13 (renewable energy) and CreMA 14 (recycling). For all other characteristic activities no GFCF data is currently available. The table below summarises the main results for Table 3 (Corporations as market producers) for 2014: CEPA/ReMEA 17

18 MLN EURO CReMA10 CReMA11 CReMA12 CReMA13 CReMA14 CReMA15 CReMA16 total Gross capital formation for the production of r services Intermediate consumption [P2] specific environmental products cleaner and resource efficient products other products Value added Compensation of employees [D1] Taxes on production [D29] Subsidies on production [ D39] (-) Consumption of fixed capital [K1] Net operating surplus TOTAL environmental output (basic proces) Main observations: CReMA 13 and CReMA 14 activities generate most RM output. Data for GFCF is partially lacking (particularly related to CreMA 14). Further research is needed for a more comprehensive picture Table 4: Total supply of resource management products Intermediate consumption of RM connected products [P2] (including noncharacteristic producers) Here, we have identified only the use of waste products by the recycling industry (NACE 38) as intermediate consumption of RM products. Data comes from the monetary supply and use tables. Import and exports With regard to characteristic RM product we identified the following important categories for import and export: Waste products. Data was obtained from the monetary supply and use tables and the EGSS trade data Recycled products Services related to renewable energy and isolation: excluded here are the actual wind mills, solar panels as these are resource efficient products. Environmental consultancy services related to RM Data is obtained from the EGSS (which in turn come from various other data sources, including international trade data and the SNA). Taxes, subsidies and margins Relevant here are the taxes, subsidies and margin on (renewable) electricity. On the one hand the energy tax also applies to renewable electricity: the part related to electricity is calculated as the share of renewable electricity in total electricity production multiplied by the total energy tax on electricity. The total subsidy on renewable energy (subsidy on product) is also known. Finally, also the total trade CEPA/ReMEA 18

19 margin for electrify is known. Again this is multiplied by the share of renewable electricity. Data is directly obtained from the monetary supply and use tables. VAT is more complicated to calculate. It can be calculated by multiplying all market production by the VAT rate (19%). However, different VAT rates by apply to certain characteristic RM products. For the moment we have applied the simple method. MLN EURO CReMA10 CReMA11 CReMA12 CReMA13 CReMA14 CReMA15 CReMA16 total TOTAL environmental output (basic proces) Intermediate consumption of RM products by corporations' market producers Imports exports Taxes on products 161 Subsidies on products 686 VAT Trade margins 81 RM output at purchasers' prices available for national uses Table 5: households Households use the following RM products: Isolation services (mainly installation of isolation in houses) Renewable energy : use of renewable energy, mainly as electricity produced from renewable sources (installation of) solar panels Services by NGO s Products of recycling shops These are all characteristic products: solar panels in principle are connected product. However households purchase installation services (which already includes the panels), the installation service is a characteristic product. Data is obtained from the EGSS data and the monetary supply and use tables and some additional assumptions. For example, it is estimated how much renewable energy is used by households based on their use of electricity from energy statistics. RM related services by NGO s are allocated to CReMA16. MLN EURO CReMA10 CReMA11 CReMA12 CReMA13 CReMA14 CReMA15 CReMA16 total ( F.5 ) Final consumption of RM products Table 6: transfers Data for transfers comes mainly from the data for central government, where the budgets from the ministries were analysed to identify transactions related to EP and RM (Statistics Netherlands, 2014b). Accordingly also environmental transfers related to CEPA/ReMEA 19

20 RM were identified and allocated to CReMA. The database also allows the identification of the receiver of the transfer, i.e. companies, households or the rest of the world. No data is currently available for RM related transfers from local government. These cannot be identified from the COFOG statistics. Particularly, we now miss some transfers to companies / households related to renewable energy and energy saving (many municipalities have their own subsidies for this topic). Main observations: Transfers to households seem to be lacking (at least for 2014). It has to be checked whether there are really no transfers here. Earmarked taxes for RM still have to be checked in more detail. In 2014 a tax was introduced which is part of the overall energy tax on electricity and gas, which is meant to finance (partly) the governments expenses on subsidies for renewable energy. This is an earmarked tax and thus can be recorded here. Data for transfers received from ROW is not yet available for the Netherlands. mln euro CReMA10 CReMA11 CReMA12 CReMA13 CReMA14 CReMA15 CReMA16 Total ( Tpg.6 ) General government: current and capital transfers paid Paid to corporations, households and rest of the world ( Trgc.6 ) General Government: current transfers received Received from rest of the world ( Trgi.6 ) General Government: investments grants and other capital transfers received Received from rest of the world ( Trcc.6 ) Corporations: current transfers received Received from GG and rest of the world ( Trci.6 ) Corporations: investments grants and other capital transfers received Received from GG and rest of the world ( TAXc.6 ) Corporations: earmarked taxes paid ( Trh.6 ) Households: transfers received Received from GG and rest of the world ( TAXh.6 ) Households: earmarked taxes paid ( Tpw.6 ) Rest of the World: current and capital transfers paid Paid to GG and other sectors ( Trwc.6 ) Rest of the World: current transfers received Received from GG ( Trwi.6 ) Rest of the World: investments grants and other capital transfers received Received from GG 3.4 Conclusions and recommendations In order to compile the ReMEA tables, we have identified the following important data sources: 1. Government budget data. As COFOG statistics do not provide information that can directly be linked to CReMA, this data needs to be generated directly from the underlying data sources, namely the government budget reports. In the CEPA/ReMEA 20

21 Netherlands we have reclassified COFOG data in our central government database to CReMA categories, where also the link to ESEA categories is already established. Accordingly, consistent and correct information is made available to allow a correct allocation to CReMA. This data is needed to fill table 1 and table 6 (transfers). 2. EGSS data (production, value added). This data is essential to determine the domestic production of characteristic RM services. This data is needed to fill table 3, 5 and part of table 4 (import and export). 3. SNA generation of income account / supply and use tables: This data is needed to distribute the value added block in table 3. In addition, data is provided for trade margins and product related taxes and subsidies (table 4). 4. Investment data (from investment statistics and/or from the SNA): This data is needed to fill tables 1,2 and 3 (GFCF). For the Netherlands we found we could compile most data of the ReMEA tables. The following data were missing or need improvement: Data for ancillary activities: not much data is available at the moment. Data for GFGF was partly missing, particularly for CReMA 14: here only data for NACE 38.3 was available, no data was found for wholesale in scrap, second hand shops, etc. Data for local government is missing. Although RM activities by local government are probably small, some important RM related transfers may come from municipalities. The calculation of VAT needs more attention: what are the correct VAT rates and is VAT charged on all related RM products and services? CEPA/ReMEA 21

22 4. Mainstreaming the compilation process for EPE Over the last two years, the work process for the compilation of the environmental expenditure accounts has been modified to a) comply to the data requirements of the new legal base for this module and b) to make the work process more efficient. This section describes the Dutch Environmental Protection Expenditure system as it is used to, among other things, fill the Eurostat Legal Base questionnaire. A high level design is part of this system, and will be used to demonstrate its functionality. This high level design starts with the top modular structure and then zooms-in on the underlying structure. The combined rectangular-triangular figures represent the input or output data while the purely rectangular figures represent modules. This grant has been especially useful as an incentive to structure the internal data already available in a more efficient, concise and consistent process. One of the aims in streamlining this process, as part of this grant, was to make more use of the preanalyses of environmental protection expenditures done by the departments responsible for general government analyses (not just environmental) in order to achieve the enhanced efficiency which is necessary to publish statistical data on a yearly basis instead of publishing once every two years. Figure 1 The first figure (P.MIE) depicts the highest design level. It has the classical structure of a data collection, analyses, followed by integration, and validation and dissemination. All data, of course, initially comes from external data sources but external here can mean, more and more, also finalised internal data coming from other sectors of Statistics Netherlands. Annual reports are mainly used to analyse national nature conservation organisations with or without terrain in possession plus international organisations, that, since recent, all publish their annual reports in pdf on-line. The analyses of these annual reports represent a large share of CEPA 6 (protection of biodiversity and landscapes). The module analyses and integration uses as one of its inputs for integration, the supply and use tables of the Dutch AGT system (National accounts), applied mainly to determine the supply of environmental services by specialist and secondary producers (Table 2 in the questionnaire). A separate environmental analyses of business statistics has been stopped, and has transitioned to connect to the AGT, which resulted in more consistency between internal data and internal published statistical data. The meaning and scope of COFOG should be clear but especially for Central Government a more detailed environmental analyses is part of the integration as part of this grant proposal. The environmental expenditures of corporations (ancillary activities) pertains to the data published as part of the yearly SBS regulation which is then, for each environmental domain, integrated with the other sectors. CEPA/ReMEA 22

23 Environmental Protection Expenditures P.MIE Start P.MIE Various external sources Annual reports Collection of data sources P.MIE.01 AGT COFOG EOC Analyses and integration P.MIE.02 Environmental expenditures corporations P.MID Environmental data compendium EOC StatLine Validation and dissemination P.MIE.03 StatLine Eurostat/ OECD Eurostat/ OECD Eurostat/ OECD End P.MIE VisioDocument Gemaakt door fwnk Verantwoordelijke versie: 28 nov, 2016 Page 1 of 4 Page 1 14:03 CEPA/ReMEA 23

24 The module validation and dissemination checks the consistency of the data and looks for outliers, using both the published national data by Statistics Netherlands and international data published by Eurostat. Figure 2 (P.MIE.01). For the module determine data sources, in order to collect the correct annual reports (mainly nature conservation organisations), it is necessary to determine first which organisations have been merged or ended or new institutions that have been set-up or split. Furthermore, as municipalities data (COFOG datya) does not allow an allocation to all CEPA categories,, a separate survey has been set up on a yearly basis, surveying about 100 municipalities in order to collect more detailed information. For the module data request/collection the annual reports of both national and international nature conservation organisations are analysed and the survey of the municipalities is executed, collected and analysed in detail. The result is then weighted to account for the total population of municipalities. Figure 3. At the top, data for the specialised producers are collected from the Dutch supply and use tables system (AGT) and allocated over the different environmental domains (CEPA). The COFOG data is taken for local government and allocated over the different environmental domains (CEPA) (for municipalities using the weighted result of the survey as discussed above). For central government a more thorough analyses is performed from detailed data files available for each governmental department or agency (Statistics Netherlands, 2014b). This is necessary additional step in order to be able to allocate the environmental data over the various environmental domains. This is especially important to separate renewable energy, by far the biggest component, from the other environmental domains. Finally the data of nature conservation organisations, specialised producers and local and central government are integrated together the SBS statistics on the environmental expenditure of corporations classified according to the NACE and agriculture. CEPA/ReMEA 24

25 Environmental Protection Expenditures P.MIE.01 Collection of data sources Start P.MIE.01 Inventorise nature conservation organisations Determine survey municipalities Determine data sources P.MIE Collect annual reports nature conservation organisations Survey selected municipalities Data request / collection P.MIE End P.MIE.01 Page 2 CEPA/ReMEA 25

26 Figure 4 (P.MIE.03) Validation of the integrated data is evaluated in the usual manner by comparing to data of the previous year (or years). This has already been done for the original sectors but after integration, a new time series is generated including information for the various environmental domains. Large deviations or outliers for each sector or domain are checked, described or if necessary corrected. The result is a basic data structure useful to generate three different kinds of publications. The first output is for Statistics Netherlands s own electronic database for national use by its researchers and citizens called StatLine. Here all environmental domains are published together with the exception of CEPA 6, biodiversity and landscape, which is published separately. The second output is the Eurostat questionnaire (Legal Base) which was published once every two years before the regulation but will now be disseminated on a yearly basis. While the previous two publications are part of the well-known dissemination of statistical data, the third may be less familiar but certainly not less important for promoting environmental awareness and divulgation of unexpected trend movements. It is called de Compendium voor de LeefOmgeving (CLO) in Dutch and has a large number of readers. The environmental data compendium as it is called in English, is published on the Internet and publically available without subscription. Here various indicators are defined, determined and published. Underlying trends and developments of these indicators are described and explained in detail. This fits into a wider discussion of environment protection expenditures within the Dutch society. CEPA/ReMEA 26

27 Environmental Protection Expenditures P.MIE.02 Analyses and integration Start P.MIE.02 AGT Data specialised producers COFOG EOC Data files local government Data files central government Analysing data P.MIE Preliminary data for nature conservation, environmental protection of local and central government, other Integration of data P.MIE Environmental expenditures corporations P.MID Validated NACE data End P.MIE.02 Page 1 CEPA/ReMEA 27

28 Environmental Protection Expenditures P.MIE.03 Validation and dissemination Start P.MIE.03 Previous period final environmental protection data for the total economy Current period preliminary environmental protection data for the total economy Data validation P.MIE Current period final environmental protection data for the total economy Data literature and Internet Statline-tabels StatLine Tabulation and dissemination of data P.MIE Legal Base EXT Eurostat/ OECD Indicators Environmental data compendium Current period final environmental protection data for the total economy End P.MIE.03 Page 4 CEPA/ReMEA 28

29 5. References Algemene Rekenkamer, Over de Algemene Rekenkamer, European Commission, European Fishery Fund ( ), Factsheet, d_en.pdf European Union (2016a), Getting started, European Union (2016b), Departments (Directorates-General) and services, Eurostat (2014b) Resource Management Expenditure Accounts (ReMEA) Guidelines Life (2016), Life Programme, Ministerie van Economische zaken, Europese landbouwbeleid TOELICHTING OP DE BETALINGEN IN HET KADER VAN HET GEMEENSCHAPPELIJK LANDBOUWBELEID IN HET BOEKJAAR 2014, table 1. European Union (2016c), Agencies and other EU bodies, Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit Directie Visserij, Perspectief voor een duurzame visserij, Operationeel programma van de lidstaat Nederland in het kader van het Europese Visserij Fonds, Eindconcept 17.12,07 Statistics Netherlands (2013). Compiling EPE Tables for the Netherlands. Eurostat grant report. Statistics Netherlands (2014a). Compiling the EPE module for the Netherlands: short time series plus improvements, Eurostat grant report. Statistics Netherlands (2014b). EPEA: classification of COFOG based source data to CEPA & CReMA, Eurostat grant report. Statistics Netherlands (2016). Testing the integration of environmental activity accounts for the Netherlands. The European fisheries fund (EFF) ( ) CEPA/ReMEA 29

30 6. Annexes 6.1 Annex 1 Eurostat questions related to EPE consultation with Eurostat (june 21th 2016 with Annamaria Szirony): 1 What funding type falls under the definition of European subsidies (i.e. current and capital transfers in the EPE questionnaire)? Is it all funding type such as grants, prices, public procurement, financial instruments, budget support and external experts, or only the grants? The categories used in the financial transparency system (FTS) (see are: Grants, Prizes (and not prices), Public procurement (including provisional commitments), Financial Instruments, Budget support, External experts. We think only grants should be considered: prizes correspond to awards and prizes paid (e.g. EU prize for women innovators...); these transactions are not described under ESA unless may be in D75 as miscellaneous current transfers c). In any case the amounts are small; public procurement is the purchase of a service; Financial instruments and budget support are only for non EU countries; External experts is the financing by EU of experts for international cooperation programs executed by EU countries. When these programs are reported by countries as international cooperation as D74 the financing of the EU should be deducted or the amount of the program should be reported on a net basis (only the national contribution). In any case before 2013 only grants are distinguished. 2) We have been able to retreat total paid out amounts in EU revenue and expenditure accounts (EU financial report). These amounts are reported at aggregated levels of payments to sustainable growth and preservation and management of natural resources. In the financial transparency system (FTS) of the European Commission a breakdown to environmental themes can be found. But unfortunately this data is mainly reported as committed amount and not paid out amount. As the financial report is leading in our study, we are hoping to develop a method with the FTS data or find new sources to enable the breakdown to environmental themes. Do you have any ideas on this matter or do know of any other sources to enable the breakdown to environmental themes? The FTS only reports on the funding managed by Commission s departments; it does not cover e.g. on farm and regional subsidies managed by national governments. CEPA/ReMEA 30

31 Commitments and payments: if national information is not available the only way would be to spread commitments referring to a program that covers several years between years consulting the program document and dividing the total commitment by the duration of the program. Breakdown by environmental domains (CEPA): the only way seems to go through the list of grants and to select the relevant ones through keywords in the various fields (program, responsible service, recipient, etc.). The same list as the one used for budget analysis could be used. 3) We also found possible differences in amounts reported by European commission and amounts published in national databases, for example in the amounts committed for agriculture funding in Is the difference between EU reports and national reports a known fact and do you have ideas on the cause of this? Is it maybe a difference in financial reporting such as different reporting period or is it cause by other reasons? One possible reason in the case of agriculture funding could be the reference period (October to October and not fiscal year); other reasons could be the control and clearance systems as well as the lag time between payments by national paying agency and reimbursements by Commission to the Member States (in the case of the EAGF on a monthly basis and in the case of EAFRD on a quarterly basis). And finally: is this subject also described in the upcoming handbook on EPE? It will be albeit in rather general terms. We would add that two important issues are: To verify that the actions financed by EU funding are effectively recorded in environmental expenditure (e.g. as ancillary output or investments) To avoid double counting when EU funding transits via governmental bodies and in particular local governments and or specific agencies. CEPA/ReMEA 31

32 6.2 Annex 2: DG Energy FTS 2013 DG energy Year Subject of the grant Total amount (Euro) Responsible Service Budget Line Beneficiary name Country Amount (Euro) ENER/FP7/268199/ECOGRID EU - LARGE SCALE SMART GRIDS DEMONSTRATION OF REAL 2011 TIME MARKET-BASEDINTEGRATION OF DER AND DR ,50 Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) DANMARKS TEKNISKE UNIVERSITET*TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK DTU Denmark N/A EANDIS CVBA* Belgium N/A EDP DISTRIBUICAO ENERGIA SA* Portugal N/A ENCT GMBH* Germany N/A ENERGINET.DK*ENDK - ENERGINET.DK -BALLERUP Denmark N/A FUNDACION TECNALIA RESEARCH & INNOVATION* Spain N/A IBM DANMARK APS*IBMDK INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES RESPONSOR IBM GLOBAL SERVICES IBM GLOBAL FINANCINGIBM SERVICE DELIVERY CENTER DENMARK Denmark N/A LANDIS+GYR AS* Denmark N/A OSTERREICHISCHES FORSCHUNGS-UND PRUEFZENTRUM ARSENAL GMBH* Austria N/A OSTKRAFT HOLDING AS* Denmark N/A SA ELIA SYSTEM OPERATOR* Belgium N/A SIEMENS AS* Denmark N/A SINTEF ENERGI AS* Norway N/A STICHTING ENERGIEONDERZOEK CENTRUMNEDERLAND*ENERGY RESEARCH CENTRE OFTHE NETHERLANDS Netherlands N/A TALLINNA TEHNIKAULIKOOL*TALLINN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Estonia N/A 2011 BIOFUEL FROM ALGAE TECHNOLOGIES ,40 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) A4F ALGAFUEL SA* Portugal N/A ABENGOA BIOENERGIA NUEVAS TECNOLOGIAS SA* Spain N/A ALGOSOURCE TECHNOLOGIES SAS*AST France N/A BEN-GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV* Israel N/A EVODOS BV* Netherlands N/A ,4889 FOTOSINTETICA & MICROBIOLOGICA SRL*F&M Italy N/A HART ENERGY PUBLISHING LP* United States N/A IN SRL* Italy N/A UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI FIRENZE* Italy N/A FP7-ENERGY /SI /FV187/ENER.C.2/ ALL-GAS INDUSTRIAL SCALE 2011 DEMONSTRATION OF SUSTAINABLE ALGAE CULTURES FOR BIOFUEL PRODUCTION ,00 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) AQUALIA GESTION INTEGRAL DEL AGUA SA* Spain N/A BDI - BIOENERGY INTERNATIONAL AG* Austria N/A FEYECON BV* Netherlands N/A FRAUNHOFER GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FORDERUNG DER ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG EV*FHG Germany N/A HYGEAR BV* Netherlands N/A SANAYI VETICARET LIMITED SIRKETI* Turkey N/A UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON* United Kingdom N/A 2011 NEXT ZERO ENERGY BUILDINGS AT LOWEST COST BY USING COMPETITIVE SUSTAINABLE ,00 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) AMSTERDAM*CITY OF AMSTERDAM Netherlands N/A ,2727 BOENDEKOMFORT I VIKEN AB*BKAB Sweden N/A COWI AS*KAMPSAX GEODAN GEOPLUS KAMPSAX DATA GEOPLAN GEOMASTERS GEODATA AGRINOVA INTERNATIONAL KAMPSAX INTERNATIONAL KAMPSAX TEKNIK Denmark N/A ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE LAUSANNE* Switzerland N/A HELSINGBORGSHEM AB* Sweden N/A HESPUL ASSOCIATION* France N/A KEMA NEDERLAND BV* Netherlands N/A ,2727 LIANDER NV* Netherlands N/A ,2727 LYON CONFLUENCE SA*SEM France N/A UNIVERSITAT KASSEL* Germany N/A PATIENTENZORG*VRIJE UNIV MEDISCH CENTRUM ACTA Netherlands N/A ,2727 DEMONSTRATION OF A COST EFFECTIVE MEDIUM SIZE CHEMICAL LOOPING COMBUSTION 2011 THROUGH PACKED BEDS USING SOLID HYDROCARBONS AS FUEL FOR POWER PRODUCTION ,00 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) ARRAY INDUSTRIES BV*G-GASSYSTEMS GAS LIQUID PROCESSING (GLP-GOUDA) ARI Netherlands N/A ,5 CERAMIQUES TECHNIQUES ET INDUSTRIELLES SA*CTI France N/A ELCOGAS SA* Spain N/A FOSTER WHEELER ITALIANA SRL* Italy N/A INSTYTUT EKOLOGII TERENOW UPRZEMYSLOWIONYCH* Poland N/A POLITECNICO DI MILANO* Italy N/A STICHTING ENERGIEONDERZOEK CENTRUMNEDERLAND*ENERGY RESEARCH CENTRE OFTHE NETHERLANDS Netherlands N/A ,5 STIFTELSEN SINTEF* Norway N/A TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITEIT EINDHOVEN*UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY TU Netherlands N/A ,5 VERBIA NANO TECHNOLOGY SL* Spain N/A VLAAMSE INSTELLING VOOR TECHNOLOGISCH ONDERZOEK NV*VITO Belgium N/A DEMONSTRATION OF A COST EFFECTIVE MEDIUM SIZE CHEMICAL LOOPING COMBUSTION 2011 THROUGH PACKED BEDS USING SOLID HYDROCARBONS AS FUEL FOR POWER PRODUCTION ,00 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) ARRAY INDUSTRIES BV*G-GASSYSTEMS GAS LIQUID PROCESSING (GLP-GOUDA) ARI Netherlands N/A ,2727 CERAMIQUES TECHNIQUES ET INDUSTRIELLES SA*CTI France N/A ELCOGAS SA* Spain N/A FOSTER WHEELER ITALIANA SRL* Italy N/A INSTYTUT EKOLOGII TERENOW UPRZEMYSLOWIONYCH* Poland N/A POLITECNICO DI MILANO* Italy N/A STICHTING ENERGIEONDERZOEK CENTRUMNEDERLAND*ENERGY RESEARCH CENTRE OFTHE NETHERLANDS Netherlands N/A ,2727 STIFTELSEN SINTEF* Norway N/A TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITEIT EINDHOVEN*UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY TU Netherlands N/A ,2727 VERBIA NANO TECHNOLOGY SL* Spain N/A VLAAMSE INSTELLING VOOR TECHNOLOGISCH ONDERZOEK NV*VITO Belgium N/A 2011 SUB-SEABED CO2 STORAGE: IMPACT ON MARINE ECOSYSTEMS (ECO2) ,00 x Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) DET NORSKE VERITAS AS* Norway N/A GOTEBORGS UNIVERSITET* Sweden N/A GRUPA LOTOS SPOLKA AKCYJNA* Poland N/A HERIOT-WATT UNIVERSITY* United Kingdom N/A INSTITUT FRANCAIS DE RECHERCHE France N/A POUR L'EXPLOITATION DE LA MER*IFREMER INSTITUT FUR WELTWIRTSCHAFT*IFW Germany N/A ISTITUTO NAZIONALE DI OCEANOGRAFIAE DI GEOFISICA SPERIMENTALE* Italy N/A KONSORTIUM DEUTSCHE MEERESFORSCHUNG EV*KDM Germany N/A LEIBNIZ-INSTITUT FUR MEERESWISSENSCHAFTEN AN DER UNIVERSITAET KIEL IFM-GEOMAR* Germany N/A MAX-PLANCK-GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FORDERUNG DER WISSENSCHAFTEN EV* Germany N/A MECKLENBURG VORPOMMERN*LAND Germany N/A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH COUNCIL* United Kingdom N/A NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR TOEGEPAST NATUURWETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK TNO*NETHERLANDS ORGANISATION FORAPPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH Netherlands N/A 37037,03704 NORSK INSTITUTT FOR VANNFORSKNING*NORWEGIAN INSTITUT FOR WATERRESEARCH NIVA Norway N/A PLYMOUTH MARINE LABORATORY LIMITED* United Kingdom N/A STATOIL PETROLEUM AS* Norway N/A STICHTING ENERGIEONDERZOEK CENTRUMNEDERLAND*ENERGY RESEARCH CENTRE OFTHE NETHERLANDS Netherlands N/A STIFTUNG ALFRED WEGENER INSTITUT FUR POLAR- UND MEERESFORSCHUNG* Germany N/A THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH* United Kingdom N/A UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA Italy N/A LASAPIENZA* UNIVERSITAT STUTTGART* Germany N/A UNIVERSITAT TRIER*ARYE MAIMON INSTIUT FUR GESCHICHTE JUDEN Germany N/A UNIVERSITEIT GENT* Belgium N/A UNIVERSITETET I BERGEN ORGANISASJONSLEDD* Norway N/A UNIVERSITETET I TROMSO* Norway N/A UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON* United Kingdom N/A UNIWERSYTET GDANSKI*UNIVERSITY Poland N/A OFGDANSK 2011 INTEGRATED OPEN SEASON GUD/GUN ,00 Directorate-General for Energy (GRT) NV NEDERLANDSE GASUNIE* Netherlands N/A ,94 CEPA/ReMEA 32

33 6.3 Annex 3: EU-subisides agriculture Source: Ministerie van Economische zaken, Europese landbouwbeleid TOELICHTING OP DE BETALINGEN IN HET KADER VAN HET GEMEENSCHAPPELIJK LANDBOUWBELEID IN HET BOEKJAAR 2014, table 1. /c5a67e7c-afe4-4f8c-abea-f27bdd1e13d2 CEPA/ReMEA 33

34 CEPA/ReMEA 34

35 CEPA/ReMEA 35

36 6.4 Annex 4: European Fishery Fund ( ) Amounts in Euro, at current prices. European Commission, European Fishery Fund ( ), Factsheet, fisheries_fund_en.pdf CEPA/ReMEA 36

37 6.5 Annex 5: Fisheries - Operational programme Source: Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit Directie Visserij, Perspectief voor een duurzame visserij, Operationeel programma van de lidstaat Nederland in het kader van het Europese Visserij Fonds, Eindconcept 17.12,07 s_nl.pdf Amount for sustainable development of fisheries for 2013 is estameted using this formule: EU 2013/Total EVF x As4 EVF/EU / x = ,2 For 2011: / x = ,8 CEPA/ReMEA 37

38 6.6 Annex 6: EMFF contribution European Comission, Facts and figures on the Common Fisheries Policy, Basic statistical data 2016 EDITION, European Union 2016 (February 2016) CEPA/ReMEA 38