Background document for the good practice documentation in the handling of environmental complaints and engagement of citizens at Member State level

Draft outline for discussion and comments

25 May 2018

Authors:

Dr. Heidi Stockhaus

Christine Lucha

2018-A7-W1-DOC5-Draft-Background-Complaints

Note that this document does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commis-sion. It is a working draft outline for comments and in particular for discussion at a work -shop to be held on 8 June 2018 in DG Environment, Brussels.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................

2. Policy and legal context for environmental complaint-handling and engagement of citizens..........................................................................................................................................

3. Relevant legal obligations and recommendations...................................................................3.1 International..........................................................................................................................

3.2 EU environmental provisions and acquis relevant to complaint-handling............................

3.3 National...............................................................................................................................

4. Relevant guidance documents and guidelines.......................................................................4.1 Complaint-handling procedures..........................................................................................

4.2 Citizen engagement in complaints procedures..................................................................

4.3 Environmental and other specific Ombuds-institutions......................................................

4.4 Citizen science....................................................................................................................

5. Examples of interesting and relevant practice........................................................................5.1 Complaint-handling procedures..........................................................................................

5.2 Citizen engagement in complaints procedures..................................................................

5.3 Environmental and other specific Ombuds-institutions......................................................

5.4 Citizen science....................................................................................................................

6. Other resources..........................................................................................................................6.1 Reports and papers............................................................................................................

6.2 European Commission.......................................................................................................

6.3 ECJ Judgements................................................................................................................

2

1. IntroductionThe goal of this background document is to provide complementary information for the good practice documentation on handling of environmental complaints and engagement of citizens at Member State level.

It provides relevant legal obligations, policy documents and examples of relevant and interesting practice.

2. Policy and legal context for environmental complaint-handling and engagement of citizens

Priority objective 4 of the 7th Environmental Action Programme: To maximise the benefits of Union environment legislation by improving implementation:One key activity in the period up to 2020: “The way in which complaints about implementation of Union environmental law are handled and remedied at national level will be improved where necessary.”1

European Commission Communication on Completing the Better Regulation Agenda: Better solutions for better results:“The better regulation agenda is about designing and evaluating EU policies and laws trans-parently, with evidence, and backed up by the views of citizens and stakeholders. It covers all policy areas and aims for targeted regulation that goes no further than required, in order to achieve objectives and bring benefits at minimum cost.”

Commission Communication on better results through better application: Bringing the bene-fits of EU law to citizens: advice and redress:“Better enforcement benefits citizens and businesses alike. They are looking for simple, prac-tical advice on their rights under EU law and how to make use of them. When their individual rights are breached, it is important that they be guided towards easily finding and making use of the most appropriate redress mechanism available at EU or national level.”2

Commission Staff Working Document on Environmental Compliance Assurance: Action 7 – Prepare documentation on good practices in the handling of environmental complaints and citizen engagement at Member State level:“While complaint mechanisms form part of the concept of environmental compliance and while they figure in a number of environmental instrument, there is currently neither a general mechanism for, nor guidance on, handling environmental complaints at national level.”3

Science Communication Unit, University of the West of England, Bristol (2013): Science for Environment Policy In-depth Report: Environmental Citizen Science. Report produced for the European Commission DG Environment, December 2013. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/science-environment-policy

Make distinction between complaints about administrative and criminal violations of environmental law by private actors and complaints about maladministration, i. e. actions of public authorities.

Clarification on the division of competences between MS/national authorities; Ombuds-instituions or similar and the EU level.

1 Decision No. 1386/2013/EU on the General Union Environment Programme to 2020 „Living well, within the limits of our planet, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013D1386&from=EN. 2 Commission Communication, 2017/C 18/02, EU law: Better results through better application, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017XC0119(01)&from=EN. 3 Commission Staff Working Document, SWD (2018)10, Environmental Compliance Assurance – Scope, concept and need for EU actions, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/pdf/SWD_2018_10_F1_OTHER_STAFF_WORKING_PAPER_EN_V5_P1_959220.pdf.

4

3. Relevant legal obligations and recommendationsTo be structured by legal instruments and level (international/EU/national)

3.1 InternationalThe Aarhus Convention defines standards for access to environmental information (Article 4), collec-tion and dissemination of environmental information (Article 5), public participation in decision-making (Articles 6 to 8), access to justice (Article 9).

Article 3General Provisions

[…]

8. Each Party shall ensure that persons exercising their rights in conformity with the provisions of this Convention shall not be penalized, persecuted or harassed in any way for their involvement. This provision shall not affect the powers of national courts to award reasonable costs in judicial proceedings.

[…]

Article 9Access to Justice

1. Each Party shall, within the framework of its national legislation, ensure that any person who considers that his or her request for information under article 4 has been ignored, wrongfully re-fused, whether in part or in full, inadequately answered, or otherwise not dealt with in accordance with the provisions of that article, has access to a review procedure before a court of law or an-other independent and impartial body established by law.

In the circumstances where a Party provides for such a review by a court of law, it shall ensure that such a person also has access to an expeditious procedure established by law that is free of charge or inexpensive for reconsideration by a public authority or review by an independent and impartial body other than a court of law.

Final decisions under this paragraph 1 shall be binding on the public authority holding the informa-tion. Reasons shall be stated in writing, at least where access to information is refused under this paragraph.

2. Each Party shall, within the framework of its national legislation, ensure that members of the public concerned

(a) Having a sufficient interest

or, alternatively,

(b) Maintaining impairment of a right, where the administrative procedural law of a Party requires this as a precondition,

have access to a review procedure before a court of law and/or another independent and impartial body established by law, to challenge the substantive and procedural legality of any decision, act or omission subject to the provisions of article 6 and, where so provided for under national law and without prejudice to paragraph 3 below, of other relevant provisions of this Convention.

What constitutes a sufficient interest and impairment of a right shall be determined in accordance with the requirements of national law and consistently with the objective of giving the public con-cerned wide access to justice within the scope of this Convention. To this end, the interest of any non-governmental organization meeting the requirements referred to in article 2, paragraph 5, shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of subparagraph (a) above. Such organizations shall also be

deemed to have rights capable of being impaired for the purpose of subparagraph (b) above.

The provisions of this paragraph 2 shall not exclude the possibility of a preliminary review proced-ure before an administrative authority and shall not affect the requirement of exhaustion of admin -istrative review procedures prior to recourse to judicial review procedures, where such a require-ment exists under national law.

3. In addition and without prejudice to the review procedures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, each Party shall ensure that, where they meet the criteria, if any, laid down in its national law, members of the public have access to administrative or judicial procedures to challenge acts and omissions by private persons and public authorities which contravene provisions of its national law relating to the environment.

4. In addition and without prejudice to paragraph 1 above, the procedures referred to in para -graphs 1, 2 and 3 above shall provide adequate and effective remedies, including injunctive relief as appropriate, and be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive. Decisions under this article shall be given or recorded in writing. Decisions of courts, and whenever possible of other bodies, shall be publicly accessible.

5. In order to further the effectiveness of the provisions of this article, each Party shall ensure that information is provided to the public on access to administrative and judicial review procedures and shall consider the establishment of appropriate assistance mechanisms to remove or reduce financial and other barriers to access to justice.

Article 15Review of compliance

The Meeting of the Parties shall establish, on a consensus basis, optional arrangements of a non-confrontational, non-judicial and consultative nature for reviewing compliance with the provisions of this Convention. These arrangements shall allow for appropriate public involvement and may in-clude the option of considering communications from members of the public on matters related to this Convention.

Further information:

UNECE (2014): Implementation Guide to the Aarhus Conventionhttp://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/Publications/Aarhus_Implementation_Guide_interact-ive_eng.pdf.

The implementation guide has been developed as a reference for policy-makers, legislators and offi-cials at all levels of government. It contains guidance for members of the public, including non-gov-ernmental organisations, seeking to exercise their rights.

3.2 EU environmental provisions and acquis relevant to complaint-handling

Some provisions of the EU environment acquis require authorities to take specific account of com-plaint or complaint-type actions.

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Article 191[…]

2. Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection taking into account the

6

diversity of situations in the various regions of the Union. It shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay.

In this context, harmonisation measures answering environmental protection requirements shall include, where appropriate, a safeguard clause allowing Member States to take provisional meas-ures, for non-economic environmental reasons, subject to a procedure of inspection by the Union.

[…]

Environmental Liability Directive 2004/35/EC

Article 12Request for action

1. Natural or legal persons:

(a) affected or likely to be affected by environmental damage or

(b) having a sufficient interest in environmental decision making relating to the damage or, altern-atively,

(c) alleging the impairment of a right, where administrative procedural law of a Member State re-quires this as a precondition,

shall be entitled to submit to the competent authority any observations relating to instances of en-vironmental damage or an imminent threat of such damage of which they are aware and shall be entitled to request the competent authority to take action under this Directive.

What constitutes a ‘sufficient interest’ and ‘impairment of a right’ shall be determined by the Mem-ber States.

To this end, the interest of any non-governmental organisation promoting environmental protection and meeting any requirements under national law shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of subparagraph (b). Such organisations shall also be deemed to have rights capable of being im-paired for the purpose of subparagraph (c).

2. The request for action shall be accompanied by the relevant information and data supporting the observations submitted in relation to the environmental damage in question.

3. Where the request for action and the accompanying observations show in a plausible manner that environmental damage exists, the competent authority shall consider any such observations and requests for action. In such circumstances the competent authority shall give the relevant op-erator an opportunity to make his views known with respect to the request for action and the ac-companying observations.

4. The competent authority shall, as soon as possible and in any case in accordance with the rel -evant provisions of national law, inform the persons referred to in paragraph 1, which submitted observations to the authority, of its decision to accede to or refuse the request for action and shall provide the reasons for it.

5. Member States may decide not to apply paragraphs 1 and 4 to cases of imminent threat of dam-age.

Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU (and behind that the reference to complaints in the Re-commendation on minimum criteria on environmental inspections)

Article 23Environmental inspections

1. Member States shall set up a system of environmental inspections of installations addressing the examination of the full range of relevant environmental effects from the installations concerned.

Member States shall ensure that operators afford the competent authorities all necessary assist-ance to enable those authorities to carry out any site visits, to take samples and to gather any in-formation necessary for the performance of their duties for the purposes of this Directive.

2. Member States shall ensure that all installations are covered by an environmental inspection plan at national, regional or local level and shall ensure that this plan is regularly reviewed and, where appropriate, updated.

3. Each environmental inspection plan shall include the following:

(a) a general assessment of relevant significant environmental issues;

(b) the geographical area covered by the inspection plan;

(c) a register of the installations covered by the plan;

(d) procedures for drawing up programmes for routine environmental inspections pursuant to para-graph 4;

(e) procedures for non-routine environmental inspections pursuant to paragraph 5;

(f) where necessary, provisions on the cooperation between different inspection authorities.

4. Based on the inspection plans, the competent authority shall regularly draw up programmes for routine environmental inspections, including the frequency of site visits for different types of install-ations.

The period between two site visits shall be based on a systematic appraisal of the environmental risks of the installations concerned and shall not exceed 1 year for installations posing the highest risks and 3 years for installations posing the lowest risks.

If an inspection has identified an important case of non-compliance with the permit conditions, an additional site visit shall be carried out within 6 months of that inspection.

The systematic appraisal of the environmental risks shall be based on at least the following cri-teria:

(a) the potential and actual impacts of the installations concerned on human health and the envir-onment taking into account the levels and types of emissions, the sensitivity of the local environ-ment and the risk of accidents;

(b) the record of compliance with permit conditions;

(c) the participation of the operator in the Union eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), pur-suant to Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 ( 1 ).

The Commission may adopt guidance on the criteria for the appraisal of environmental risks.

5. Non-routine environmental inspections shall be carried out to investigate serious environmental complaints, serious environmental accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance as soon as possible and, where appropriate, before the granting, reconsideration or update of a per-mit.

6. Following each site visit, the competent authority shall prepare a report describing the relevant findings regarding compliance of the installation with the permit conditions and conclusions on whether any further action is necessary.

The report shall be notified to the operator concerned within 2 months of the site visit taking place. The report shall be made publicly available by the competent authority in accordance with Direct-ive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information within 4 months of the site visit taking place.

Without prejudice to Article 8(2), the competent authority shall ensure that the operator takes all

8

the necessary actions identified in the report within a reasonable period.

Seveso Directive 2012/18/EU

Article 20Inspections

1. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities organise a system of inspections.

2. Inspections shall be appropriate to the type of establishment concerned. They shall not be de-pendent upon receipt of the safety report or any other report submitted. They shall be sufficient for a planned and systematic examination of the systems being employed at the establishment, whether of a technical, organisational or managerial nature, so as to ensure in particular that:

(a) the operator can demonstrate that he has taken appropriate measures, in connection with the various activities of the establishment, to prevent major accidents;

(b) the operator can demonstrate that he has provided appropriate means for limiting the con-sequences of major accidents, on-site and off-site;

(c) the data and information contained in the safety report, or any other report submitted, ad-equately reflects the conditions in the establishment;

(d) information has been supplied to the public pursuant to Article 14.

3. Member States shall ensure that all establishments are covered by an inspection plan at na-tional, regional or local level and shall ensure that this plan is regularly reviewed and, where appro-priate, updated.

Each inspection plan shall include the following:

(a) a general assessment of relevant safety issues;

(b) the geographical area covered by the inspection plan;

(c) a list of the establishments covered by the plan;

(d) a list of groups of establishments with possible domino effects pursuant to Article 9;

(e) a list of establishments where particular external risks or hazard sources could increase the risk or consequences of a major accident;

(f) procedures for routine inspections, including the programmes for such inspections pursuant to paragraph 4;

(g) procedures for non-routine inspections pursuant to paragraph 6;

(h) provisions on the co-operation between different inspection authorities.

4. Based on the inspection plans referred to in paragraph 3, the competent authority shall regularly draw up programmes for routine inspections for all establishments including the frequency of site visits for different types of establishments.

The period between two consecutive site visits shall not exceed one year for upper-tier establish-ments and three years for lower- tier establishments, unless the competent authority has drawn up an inspection programme based on a systematic appraisal of major-accident hazards of the estab-lishments concerned.

5. The systematic appraisal of the hazards of the establishments concerned shall be based on at least the following criteria:

(a) the potential impacts of the establishments concerned on human health and the environment;

(b) the record of compliance with the requirements of this Directive.

Where appropriate, relevant findings of inspections carried out under other Union legislation shall

also be taken into account.

6. Non-routine inspections shall be carried out to investigate serious complaints, serious accidents and ‘near misses’, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance as soon as possible.

7. Within four months after each inspection, the competent authority shall communicate the conclu-sions of the inspection and all the necessary actions identified to the operator. The competent au-thority shall ensure that the operator takes all those necessary actions within a reasonable period after receipt of the communication.

8. If an inspection has identified an important case of non- compliance with this Directive, an addi-tional inspection shall be carried out within six months.

9. Inspections shall, where possible, be coordinated with inspections under other Union legislation and combined, where appropriate.

10. Member States shall encourage the competent authorities to provide mechanisms and tools for exchanging experience and consolidating knowledge, and to participate in such mechanisms at Union level where appropriate.

11. Member States shall ensure that operators provide the competent authorities with all neces-sary assistance to enable those authorities to carry out any inspection and to gather any informa-tion necessary for the performance of their duties for the purposes of this Directive, in particular to allow the authorities to fully assess the possibility of a major accident and to determine the scope of possible increased probability or aggravation of major accidents, to prepare an external emer-gency plan and to take into account substances which, due to their physical form, particular condi-tions or location, may require additional consideration.

CCS Directive 2009/31/EC

Article 15Inspections

1. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities organise a system of routine and non-routine inspections of all storage complexes within the scope of this Directive for the purposes of checking and promoting compliance with the requirements of the Directive and of monitoring the effects on the environment and on human health.

2. Inspections should include activities such as visits of the surface installations, including the in-jection facilities, assessing the injection and monitoring operations carried out by the operator, and checking all relevant records kept by the operator.

3. Routine inspections shall be carried out at least once a year until three years after closure and every five years until transfer of responsibility to the competent authority has occurred. They shall examine the relevant injection and monitoring facilities as well as the full range of relevant effects from the storage complex on the environment and on human health.

4. Non-routine inspections shall be carried out:

(a) if the competent authority has been notified or made aware of leakages or significant irregularit-ies pursuant to Article 16(1);

(b) if the reports pursuant to Article 14 have shown insufficient compliance with the permit condi-tions;

(c) to investigate serious complaints related to the environment or human health;

(d) in other situations where the competent authority considers this appropriate.

5. Following each inspection, the competent authority shall prepare a report on the results of the inspection. The report shall evaluate compliance with the requirements of this Directive and indic-ate whether or not further action is necessary. The report shall be communicated to the operator

10

concerned and shall be publicly available in accordance with relevant Community legislation within two months of the inspection.

Recommendation on minimum criteria for environmental inspections, 2001/331

VIIInvestigations of serious accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance

Member States should ensure that the investigation of serious accidents, incidents and occur-rences of non-compliance with EC legislation, whether these come to the attention of the authori-ties through a complaint or otherwise, is carried out by the relevant authority in order to:

(a) clarify the causes of the event and its impact on the environment, and as appropriate, the re-sponsibilities and possible liabilities for the event and its consequences, and to forward conclu-sions to the authority responsible for enforcement, if different from the inspecting authority;

(b) mitigate and, where possible, remedy the environmental impacts of the event through a deter-mination of the appropriate actions to be taken by the operator(s) and the authorities;

(c) determine action to be taken to prevent further accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance;

(d) enable enforcement action or sanctions to proceed, if appropriate; and

(e) ensure that the operator takes appropriate follow-up actions.

Victims Directive 2012/29/EU (in relation to complaints that relate to environmental crimes, the Envir-onmental Crime Directive being also relevant here)

Article 5Right of victims when making a complaint

1. Member States shall ensure that victims receive written acknowledgement of their formal com-plaint made by them to the competent authority of a Member State, stating the basic elements of the criminal offence concerned.

2. Member States shall ensure that victims who wish to make a complaint with regard to a criminal offence and who do not understand or speak the language of the competent authority be enabled to make the complaint in a language that they understand or by receiving the necessary linguistic assistance.

3. Member States shall ensure that victims who do not understand or speak the language of the competent authority, receive translation, free of charge, of the written acknowledgement of their complaint provided for in paragraph 1, if they so request, in a language that they understand.

Access to Environmental Information Directive 2003/4/EC

Article 6Access to justice

1. Member States shall ensure that any applicant who considers that his request for information has been ignored, wrongfully refused (whether in full or in part), inadequately answered or other-wise not dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Articles 3, 4 or 5, has access to a proced-ure in which the acts or omissions of the public authority concerned can be reconsidered by that or another public authority or reviewed administratively by an independent and impartial body estab-lished by law. Any such procedure shall be expeditious and either free of charge or inexpensive.

2. In addition to the review procedure referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that

an applicant has access to a review procedure before a court of law or another independent and impartial body established by law, in which the acts or omissions of the public authority concerned can be reviewed and whose decisions may become final. Member States may furthermore provide that third parties incriminated by the disclosure of information may also have access to legal re-course.

3. Final decisions under paragraph 2 shall be binding on the public authority holding the informa-tion. Reasons shall be stated in writing, at least where access to information is refused under this Article.

EMAS Regulation 1221/2009

Annex IIEnvironmental Management System Requirements and Additional Issues to be addressed by Or-

ganisations implementing EMAS

[…]

B.7. Communication(1) Organisations shall be able to demonstrate that they conduct an open dialogue with the public, the authorities and other interested parties including local communities and customers in relation to the environmental impact of their activities, products and services.

(2) To ensure a high level of transparency and building confidence with interested parties, organ-isations registered under EMAS shall disclose specific environmental information as defined by Annex IV Environmental Reporting.

[…]

A.9.3 Management reviewTop management shall review the organisation's environmental management system, at planned intervals, to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

The management review shall include consideration of:

[…]

(f) relevant communication(s) from interested parties, including complaints;

[…]

Charter of Fundamental RightsText: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT&from=EN

Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/eu-charter-fundamental-rights_en

Strategy: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0573:FIN:en:PDF

The Charter of Fundamental Rights is more directed towards European Institutions than Member State authorities. However, effective complaint-handling mechanisms promote the public’s trust in institutions and the government. A treatment of complainants in line with the principles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights contributes to the effectiveness of complaint handling and to safeguarding fundamental rights, in -cluding freedom of speech and democratic accountability. There are various linkages between complaint-handling and fundamental rights protection.

12

3.3 NationalInclude examples filled in by MS authorities

4. Relevant guidance documents and guidelines

4.1 Complaint-handling procedures

Procedures on complaining to the European CommissionComplaint form for breach of EU lawhttps://ec.europa.eu/assets/sg/report-a-breach/complaints_en/

https://ec.europa.eu/info/about-european-commission/contact/problems-and-complaints_en

Procedures on complaining to the CJEUhttps://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_7031/en/

Procedures on complaining to the ECHRhttps://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=applicants&c=

Procedures on complaining to the Aarhus Convention Compliance CommitteeUNECE (no year provided): Guidance document on the Aarhus Convention Compliance Mechanism

http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/CC_GuidanceDocument.pdf

European Ombudsman (2011): “The European Ombudsman’s Guide to Complaints – A Public-ation for Staff of the EU Institutions, Bodies, Offices and Agencies”https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/resources/staffguide.faces

The booklet explains how institutions best respond to complaints that the Ombudsman brings to their attention and how to avoid complaints in the first place.

Form: https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/atyourservice/secured/complaintform.faces

Petitions Committee of the European ParliamentHome: https://petiport.secure.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/en/home

Form: https://petiport.secure.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/en/registration/register

FAQ: https://petiport.secure.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/en/faq

Crossett and Shepherd (2014): “Technical Assistance for Strengthening the Capacity of the Ministry of Environment in Albania for Law Drafting and Enforcement of National Environ-mental Legislation, Component B: Improved inspection, enforcement and prosecution of en-vironmental legislation”http://www.ibeca.al/pages/docs/SELEA/SEI Handbook 20140402.pdf

Annex 13 of the handbook gives information about environmental complaints, explaining the re-sponsibilities of authorities and the procedures. It also contains an environmental complaint form that can be used to record complaints.

14

4.2 Citizen engagement in complaints proceduresIMPEL (2005-2010): Resolution of environmental conflicts by neighbourhood dialoguehttps://www.impel.eu/projects/resolution-of-environmental-conflicts-by-neighbourhood-dialogue/

IMPEL (2009): Development of a Guideline for self-evaluation of neighbourhood dialogue. Phase III of the project “Resolution of environmental conflicts by neighbourhood dialogue. Final report.http://www.impel.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/2007-01-Neighbourhood-Dialogue-III-Guideline-for-self-evaluation-FINAL-REPORT-1.pdf

4.3 Environmental and other specific Ombuds-institutionsUmweltanwaltschaft Austriahttp://www.umweltanwaltschaft.gv.at/en/

The prime objective of the environmental Ombuds-bodies of the provinces is to assert and protect the interests of the environment on behalf of the local population. In order to improve the quality of the environment these bodies engages in continuous dialogue with environmental institutions, research institutes and organisations which are committed to environmental protection.

Consumer Ombudsman Norway (2009): The Consumer Ombudsman’s Guidelines on the Use of Environmental and Ethical Claims in Marketinghttps://www.forbrukertilsynet.no/content/2016/04/The-Consumer-Ombudsman%E2%80%99s-guidelines-on-the-use-of-environmental-and-etical-claims-in-marketing.pdf

The objective of these Guidelines is to prevent consumers from being misled and to influence traders to comply with the Marketing Control Act regarding ethical and environmental marketing. These Guidelines shall contribute to providing the trader with knowledge of the requirements upon which the Consumer Ombudsman bases its assessment of whether ethical and environmental claims in mar-keting are in compliance with the Marketing Control Act. Furthermore, the Guidelines shall ensure consistency and equality in the Consumer Ombudsman’s case handling procedures, in addition to being a link in the information passed down to traders.

Danish Consumer Ombudsman (2014): Guidance from the Consumer Ombudsman on the use of environmental and ethical claims, etc., in marketinghttps://www.consumerombudsman.dk/media/49009/vejledning-om-miljoemaessige-paastande-en-gelsk-udgave-2.pdf

Local Government Ombudsman (2017): Guidance on Jurisdictionhttps://www.lgo.org.uk/information-centre/staff-guidanceGuidance for staff on how to interpret the Local Government Act 1974

Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) (2008): Advisory Note. A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for Development Projectshttp://www.cao-ombudsman.org/howwework/advisor/documents/implemgrieveng.pdf

4.4 Citizen science ECSA: Ten Principles of Citizen Sciencehttps://ecsa.citizen-science.net/sites/default/files/ecsa_ten_principles_of_citizen_science.pdf

The ECSA Working Group "Sharing Best Practice and Building Capacity" has elaborated a best prac-tice guideline on what constitutes good citizen science in 2015. The 10 Principles of Citizen Science have been presented at the ECSA General Assembly 2015 in Barcelona.

Horizon 2020 project LandSensehttps://ecsa.citizen-science.net/blog/introducing-landsense-horizon-2020-project

The main aim of LandSense is to build an innovative citizen observatory in the field of Land Use Land Cover (LULC), which collects data both actively (through citizens) and passively (from authoritative, and open access sources) and integrates them to provide valuable quality-assured in-situ data for SMEs, larger businesses, government agencies, NGOs and researchers.

Horizon 2020 project SOCIENTIZE (Society as e-Infrastructure through technology, innovation and creativity)http://socientize.eu/?q=eu/content/socientize-0

The SOCIENTIZE project coordinated all agents involved in the citizen science process, setting the basis for this new open science paradigm. The project promoted the usage of science infrastructures composed of dedicated and external resources, including professional and amateur scientists. SOCI-ENTIZE set-up a network where infrastructure providers and researchers recruit volunteers from a general public to perform science at home.

Horizon 2020 project “Doing It Together” Science (DITOs)http://togetherscience.eu/

DITOs implements many innovative participatory event formats across Europe focusing on the active involvement of citizens in two critical areas: the cutting edge topic of biodesign and the pressing area of environmental monitoring.

16

5. Examples of interesting and relevant practice

5.1 Complaint-handling procedures

Questions for practitioners and others:

Do you have good examples for complaint handling mechanisms from your countries that are still in use?

5.2 Citizen engagement in complaints procedures

Questions for practitioners and others:

Do you have good examples for citizen engagement in complaints procedures from your countries that are still in use?

5.3 Environmental and other specific Ombuds-institutions

5.4 Citizen science

6. Other resourcesThis section contains links to resources that come in neither of the above categories, but could still be useful.

6.1 Reports and papersEcologic Institute, IIEP, Bio Intelligence Service and IVM (2012): “Study on environmental complaint-handling and mediation mechanisms at national level”http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/mediation_and_complaint-handling.pdf

The report gives an overview on the characteristics of complaint handling and mediation in the envir-onment sector in ten selected EU Member States. It identifies and analyses good practice features as well as bottlenecks and barriers of environmental complaint handling mechanisms. The report makes proposals on how the complaint handling and mediation mechanisms may be improved with a view to promoting compliance with EU environmental law and a level playing field.

Questions for practitioners and others:

Do you have reports and papers for complaint handling mechanisms that can be a use-ful resource?

6.2 European Commission

6.3 ECJ Judgements

18