(1)

Soil is a vital, limited resource and is considered non-renewable and irreplaceable on a human time-scale. It is crucial for the economy, the environment and society in general.

(2)

Healthy soils are soils that are in good chemical, biological and physical condition and which can therefore provide ecosystem services vital to humans and the environment, such as safe, nutritious and sufficient food, biomass, clean water, nutrients cycling, carbon storage and a habitat for biodiversity. Soils are also essential for ensuring food security. However, it is estimated that 60 to 70 % of the soils in the Union are degraded and continue to deteriorate.

(3)

Soils also provide other services, such as acting as a physical platform for infrastructure and for human activities, being a source of raw materials, or constituting an archive of geological, geomorphological and archaeological heritage. Not all of those other services need a functional ecosystem to be provided. Such other services are often the most prevalent uses of soil, causing a significant loss of vital ecosystem services. It is therefore important to find a balance between those two types of services provided by soils.

(4)

Soil degradation affects ecosystem services provided by soils, with a negative impact on human health and on the environment. Soil degradation can cover aspects related to physical degradation, such as soil sealing and soil artificialisation in general, soil erosion, soil compaction and reduction of soil water retention and infiltration, and aspects related to chemical or biological degradation, such as excess and depletion of nutrients, acidification, salinisation and soil contamination, and loss of soil organic carbon, soil biodiversity and soil biological activity.

(5)

Soil degradation costs the Union tens of billions of euro every year. Soil health impacts the provision of ecosystem services that have a significant economic return. The improvement of soil health makes sound economic sense and could significantly increase the price and value of land in the Union. Moreover, it can take hundreds of years to produce just 1 centimetre of topsoil, while the degradation process and complete loss of soil can occur rapidly.

(6)

The Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ set out an ambitious roadmap to transform the Union into a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy, aiming to protect, conserve and enhance the Union’s natural capital and to protect the health and well-being of its citizens. As part of the European Green Deal, the Commission adopted the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 set out in its communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, Bringing nature back into our lives’, the Farm to Fork Strategy set out in its communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system’, the Zero Pollution Action Plan set out in its communication of 12 May 2021 entitled ‘Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All EU Action Plan: Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil’, the EU Climate Adaptation Strategy set out in its communication of 24 February 2021 entitled ‘Forging a climate-resilient Europe – the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change’ and the EU Soil Strategy for 2030 set out in its communication of 17 November 2021 entitled ‘EU Soil Strategy for 2030: Reaping the benefits of healthy soils for people, food, nature and climate’.

(7)

The Union is committed to the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Healthy soils contribute directly to the achievement of several SDGs, in particular SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG 13 (climate action) and SDG 15 (life on land). SDG 15.3 aims to combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world by 2030.

(8)

The Union and its Member States, as parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (4), approved by Council Decision 93/626/EEC (5), agreed at the 15th Conference of the Parties to that Convention on the ‘Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’, which comprises several action-oriented global targets for 2030 of relevance for soil health. According to that Framework, nature’s contributions to people, including soil health, need to be restored, maintained and enhanced.

(9)

The Union and its Member States, as parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa (UNCCD) (6), approved by Council Decision 98/216/EC (7), have committed to combatting desertification and mitigating the effects of drought in affected countries. Fourteen Member States, namely Bulgaria, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Hungary, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia, have declared themselves as countries affected by desertification under the UNCCD.

(10)

In the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), approved by Council Decision 94/69/EC (8), land and soil are considered simultaneously as a source and a sink of carbon. The Union and its Member States, as parties to the UNFCCC, have committed to promote sustainable management, conservation and enhancement of carbon sinks and reservoirs.

(11)

The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 states that it is essential to step up efforts to protect soil fertility, reduce soil erosion and increase soil organic matter by adopting sustainable soil management practices. It also states that significant progress is needed on identifying contaminated soil sites, restoring degraded soils, defining the conditions for good ecological status of soils, introducing restoration objectives and improving the monitoring of soil health.

(12)

The EU Soil Strategy for 2030 sets the long-term vision that, by 2050, all Union soil ecosystems are in a healthy condition and are thus more resilient. As a key solution, healthy soils contribute to addressing the Union’s goals of achieving climate neutrality and becoming resilient in relation to climate change, developing a clean and circular economy, including a clean and circular bioeconomy, reversing biodiversity loss, safeguarding human health, halting desertification and reversing land degradation.

(13)

Funding is vital to enable a transition to healthy soils. The 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, laid down in Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 (9), presents several funding opportunities available for the protection, sustainable management and regeneration of soils. ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’ is one of the five EU missions of Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council (10), and is specifically dedicated to promoting soil health. The EU Mission ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’ is a key instrument for the implementation of this Directive, and aims to lead the transition to healthy soils through funding an ambitious research and innovation programme, establishing a network of 100 living labs and lighthouses in rural and urban areas, advancing the development of a harmonised soil monitoring framework and increasing awareness of the importance of soil. Other Union policies and programmes that present objectives contributing to healthy soils are the common agricultural policy (CAP), the cohesion policy funds, the Programme for Environment and Climate Action (LIFE), established by Regulation (EU) 2021/783 of the European Parliament and of the Council (11), Horizon Europe, the Technical Support Instrument, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/240 of the European Parliament and of the Council (12), the Recovery and Resilience Facility, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13), and the InvestEU Programme, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council (14). As the goal to have all soils within the Union in a healthy condition is of common interest, there is a need to increase the mobilisation of resources, including private capital, and to enhance cooperation with relevant financial institutions, such as the European Investment Bank, in order to support soil health and soil resilience.

(14)

In the EU Soil Strategy for 2030, the Commission announced it would submit a legislative proposal on soil health to enable the objectives of that strategy to be met and good soil health to be achieved across the Union by 2050. In its resolution of 28 April 2021 on soil protection, the European Parliament emphasised the importance of protecting soil and promoting healthy soils in the Union, bearing in mind that soil degradation continues, despite the limited and uneven action being taken in some Member States. The European Parliament called on the Commission to design a Union-wide common legal framework, with full respect for the subsidiarity principle, for the protection and sustainable use of soil, addressing all major soil threats. Significantly, the European Parliament underlined the risks stemming from the absence of a level playing field for the functioning of the internal market and the strong potential of a common legal framework on soil to stimulate fair competition in the private sector, develop innovative solutions and know-how, and strengthen the export of technologies outside the Union.

(15)

In its conclusions of 23 October 2020, the Council supported the Commission in stepping up efforts to better protect soils and soil biodiversity, as a non-renewable resource of vital importance.

(16)

Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council (15) sets out a binding objective of climate neutrality in the Union by 2050 and negative emissions thereafter, to be achieved by prioritising swift and predictable emission reductions and, at the same time, enhancing removals by natural sinks. Sustainable soil management results in increased carbon sequestration and in most cases in co-benefits for ecosystems and biodiversity. The Commission communication of 15 December 2021 entitled ‘Sustainable Carbon Cycles’ underlined the need for clear and transparent identification of the activities that unambiguously remove carbon from the atmosphere, such as the development of a Union framework for the certification of carbon removals from natural ecosystems, including soils. Moreover, Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council (16) not only makes soil carbon central to the achievement of targets on the pathway to a climate neutral Europe, but also calls for Member States to prepare a system for the monitoring of soil carbon stocks, using, inter alia, the land use/cover area frame statistical survey (LUCAS) datasets.

(17)

The EU Climate Adaptation Strategy underlined that using nature-based solutions inland, including the restoration of the sponge-like function of soils, will boost the supply of clean and fresh water, reduce the impacts of flooding and alleviate the impacts of droughts. It is important to maximise the capacity of soils to retain and purify water and reduce pollution.

(18)

The Zero Pollution Action Plan sets out the vision for 2050 that air, water and soil pollution is reduced to levels no longer considered harmful to health and natural ecosystems and that respect the boundaries our planet can cope with, thus creating a toxic-free environment.

(19)

The Commission communication of 23 March 2022 entitled ‘Safeguarding food security and reinforcing the resilience of food systems’ stressed that food sustainability is fundamental for food security. Healthy soils make the Union food system more resilient by providing the basis for nutritious and sufficient food.

(20)

It is necessary to set measures for Union-wide harmonised monitoring and assessment of, and support for, soil health and soil resilience and tackling contaminated sites, in order to achieve healthy soils by 2050, to maintain soils in a healthy condition and meet the Union’s objectives on climate and biodiversity, to prevent and respond to droughts and natural disasters, to protect human health and to ensure food security and safety.

(21)

Soils host more than 25 % of all biodiversity and are the second-largest carbon pool on the planet. On account of their ability to capture and store carbon, healthy soils contribute to the achievement of the Union’s objectives on climate change. Soil biodiversity encompasses micro-organisms, including bacteria, fungi, protists and nematodes, as well as larger organisms, such as earthworms and insects, and plant roots, which collectively contribute to the ecological and functional diversity of soil ecosystems. Healthy soils also provide a favourable habitat for organisms to thrive and are crucial for enhancing biodiversity and the stability of related ecosystems. Biodiversity below and above ground are intimately connected and interact through mutualistic relationships between species, such as mycorrhizal fungi that connect plant roots. Therefore, the importance of collection and analysis of information on the presence of soil bacteria and fungi should be recognised and serve as a foundation for the potential future expansion of biodiversity monitoring.

(22)

Soil organic matter is crucial for the provision of soil ecosystem services and functions, as it reduces soil degradation such as erosion and compaction, while increasing the buffering, water-holding, infiltration and cation exchange capacity of the soil. Soil organic matter can improve not only the structural stability of soils, but also the development of biomass, including an increase in crop yields. Additionally, soil organic matter positively affects soil biodiversity and can increase the amount of carbon sequestered in soils and therefore the soil organic carbon stocks, thereby contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation.

(23)

Floods, wildfires and extreme weather events are natural disaster risks of the highest concern across Europe. The concerns regarding droughts and water scarcity are rapidly increasing across the Union. In 2020, 24 Member States considered droughts and water scarcity to be key emerging or climate-related disaster risks, compared to only 11 Member States in 2015. Healthy soils are instrumental in ensuring resilience in relation to droughts and natural disasters. Practices that enhance water retention and nutrient availability in soils, soil structure, soil biodiversity and carbon sequestration increase the resilience of ecosystems, plants and crops to withstand and recover from drought, natural disasters, heatwaves and extreme weather events, which will become more frequent in the future due to climate change. In contrast, without proper soil management, drought and natural disasters cause soil degradation and make soils unhealthy. Improvement of soil health helps to mitigate the fatalities and the economic losses associated with climate-related extremes, which amounted to more than 182 000 casualties and approximately 560 billion EUR in the Union between 1980 and 2021.

(24)

Soil health contributes directly to human health and well-being. Healthy soils provide safe and nutritious food, and have the ability to filter contaminants, hence preserving drinking water quality. Soil contamination can harm human health through ingestion, inhalation or dermal contact. Human exposure to the healthy soil microbial community is beneficial in relation to developing the immune system and resistance to certain diseases and allergies. Healthy soils support the growth of trees, flowers and grasses, and create green infrastructure that offers aesthetic value, well-being and an improved quality of life.

(25)

Soil degradation impacts soil fertility, yields, pest resistance and nutritional food quality. Since 95 % of our food is directly or indirectly produced on soils and the global population continues to increase, it is crucial that this finite natural resource remains healthy to ensure food security in the long-term and secure the productivity and profitability of Union agriculture. It is important to maintain or enhance soil health and contribute to the sustainability and resilience of the food system.

(26)

The aspirational long-term objective of this Directive is to achieve healthy soils by 2050. In light of the limited knowledge regarding the condition of soils and regarding the effectiveness and costs of the measures to regenerate their health, this Directive focuses on establishing a soil monitoring framework and assessing the situation of soils throughout the Union. This Directive also includes support for soil health and soil resilience as well as for assessment and management of the risks of contaminated sites. However, it does not impose an obligation on Member States to achieve healthy soils by 2050 or set intermediate targets. As soon as the results of the first assessment of soil health and related trend analysis are available, the Commission should take stock of the progress made towards achieving the objectives of this Directive and assess the need for its possible amendment.

(27)

Addressing the pressures on soils and supporting soil health and soil resilience require that certain characteristics be taken into account, namely the variety of soil types, the specific local and climatic conditions and the land use or the land cover. It is therefore appropriate that Member States establish soil districts and soil units. Soil districts should reflect the administrative territories under the responsibility of appropriate governance structures and cover one or several entire soil units. In turn, soil units should reflect a certain degree of homogeneity of those characteristics, for the monitoring and assessment of soil health across all of the territory of Member States. Soil units should be under the responsibility of those governance structures, enabling Member States to ensure that the monitoring and assessment of soil health are properly undertaken, and that the support for soil health and soil resilience complies with the requirements under this Directive.

(28)

To design the sampling survey for soil monitoring, Member States will need to take into account their soil districts and soil units. In order to ensure a sufficient level of harmonisation between Member States, a set of minimum criteria for defining soil units should be established at Union level, taking into account at least the soil type and land use. For that purpose, the map of the Soil Regions of the European Union and Adjacent Countries 1:5 000 000, published by the Federal Institute of Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), in partnership with the Joint Research Centre (JRC), could be used. That map builds on soil types as defined in the World Reference Base for Soil Resources, coordinated by the International Union of Soil Sciences, as well as on fully comparable and harmonised basic data at the continental level, such as on climate, topography, relief, geology and vegetation. As regards land use, the categories defined in Regulation (EU) 2018/841 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines serve as a harmonised basis for land use reporting. Therefore, in order to delineate soil units, Member States should take into account at least the soil districts, as well as the soil regions and the land use categories. On account of spatial variability in soil properties and land use, a soil unit can consist of non-adjacent areas. In addition, climatic and environmental conditions can be taken into account when delineating soil units. More detailed or updated information at the Union, national or subnational level could be used, where available. When establishing their soil units, Member States can draw on additional available data on climate, environmental zones or river basins. In this context, the Alterra Report 2281 on ‘Descriptions of the European Environmental Zones and Strata’ of January 2012 is especially relevant as it provides datasets on generic classification of environmental stratification of Europe, aggregated into environmental zones, which can be used for the establishment of soil units by Member States.

(29)

In order to ensure appropriate governance in relation to soils, Member States should be required to designate the competent authorities responsible at an appropriate level for carrying out the obligations provided for in this Directive, including one or more competent authorities for each soil district. Member States should be allowed to designate any additional competent authority at the appropriate level, including at national or subnational level. It is essential that Member States provide the Commission with up-to-date information on the designated competent authorities.

(30)

Member States should be allowed to designate the appropriate competent authority for carrying out the obligations provided for in this Directive at military sites. In addition, data and information pertaining to military sites should not be disclosed, if their disclosure adversely affects public security or national defence. Therefore, Member States should be permitted not to make accessible to the public data and information the disclosure of which would adversely affect public security or national defence, even through a digital soil health data portal to be established by the Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) or a national register of potentially contaminated sites and contaminated sites to be set up by Member States, and should be permitted not to report such data and information to the Commission and the EEA.

(31)

In order to have a common understanding of healthy soil condition, it is necessary to establish a minimum common set of measurable criteria which, if not respected, would lead to a critical loss in the capacity of soil to function as a vital living system and to provide ecosystem services. Such criteria should reflect and be based on the existing level of soil science.

(32)

In order to describe soil degradation, it is necessary to establish common soil descriptors that can be measured or estimated. Even if there is significant variability between soil types, climatic conditions and land uses, current scientific knowledge allows the setting of criteria at Union level for some of those soil descriptors. However, Member States should be able to adapt the criteria for some of those soil descriptors based on specific national or local conditions and to define the criteria for other soil descriptors for which common criteria at Union level cannot be established at this stage. For those soil descriptors for which clear criteria that would distinguish between healthy and unhealthy soil condition cannot be established at this stage, their monitoring and assessment will facilitate the possible development of such criteria in the future.

(33)

The criteria for healthy soil condition of the soil descriptors should be divided into non-binding sustainable target values and operational trigger values. The non-binding sustainable target values should reflect the aspirational long-term objective of this Directive and do not create an obligation to act. Those non-binding sustainable target values should reflect, based on the current scientific knowledge, the ideal situation whereby the capacity of soils to provide ecosystem services will not decrease and no significant harm will be caused to human health or the environment. However, bearing in mind the need for efficiency and the limited resources available, and in order to reflect local conditions, operational trigger values set by Member States are needed. Those operational trigger values should set in motion support to achieve soil health and soil resilience. For each aspect of soil degradation, one or several proportional and feasible operational trigger values should be set. Setting the trigger values at national level will ensure that local conditions and practices, soil use and current policies can be fully taken into account. Member States could decide to set the operational trigger value for one or more aspects of soil degradation at the same level as the non-binding sustainable target value for those aspects of soil degradation. The Commission should support Member States in setting the non-binding sustainable target values and operational trigger values.

(34)

Some soils have special characteristics, either because they are atypical by nature and constitute rare habitats for biodiversity or unique landscapes or because they have been heavily modified by humans and could contain tangible traces of human history. Those characteristics should be taken into account in the context of the definition of healthy soils and the requirements to achieve healthy soil condition.

(35)

Similarly to its aspirational long-term objective to achieve healthy soils by 2050, and with a view to contributing to the objectives of the EU Soil Strategy for 2030 and in particular to the ‘No Net Land Take’ objective, this Directive also aims to adopt a stepwise approach to the issue of land take. To contribute to that long-term objective, it is important to assess the various processes of land take, and aim to reduce and mitigate their impact on soil health and ecosystem services. This Directive thus aims to set up a soil monitoring framework for the more visible aspects of land take, namely soil sealing and soil removal, using tools already available at Union level through services delivered under the Copernicus component of the Union Space Programme, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/696 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17) (‘Copernicus services’), optionally complemented with national remote-sensing data and national inventories. The aim is to have a common understanding with regard to soil sealing and soil removal and to initiate preliminary reflections at national level, based on sound data.

(36)

Without prejudice to Member States’ competence for taxation and to the ‘polluter pays’ principle, the provisions concerning soil health monitoring under Chapter II of this Directive should not be understood as creating any financial burden on landowners and land managers other than Member States and the competent authorities.

(37)

Soil is a limited resource subject to ever-growing competition for different uses. Land take is a process which causes a modification of land use and of the characteristics of the soil. It can be seen as an overarching concept that can be subdivided into multiple aspects. The first aspect of land take is a change from natural and semi-natural land uses towards settlement areas. The second aspect of land take is soil artificialisation caused by the durable alteration of the soil components and soil characteristics, resulting in a loss of the capacity of soils to provide ecosystem services. Soil artificialisation can be further divided into three main processes, namely soil sealing, soil removal and other types of soil artificialisation. Soil sealing equates to a covering of the soils with artificial materials, which are completely or partially impermeable. Buildings are an example of impermeable soil sealing. Train tracks built with permeable materials are a type of partially impermeable soil sealing. Roads, waste disposal grounds and dumping grounds could be considered as other examples of soil sealing. Soil removal is a temporary or long-term removal of the surface layer of the soil and sometimes of the subsoil in an area. It occurs, for example during construction works, open-pit mining or quarrying. There are other, less visible, types of soil artificialisation such as the intentional stabilisation and compaction of soil, the modification of layers of soil or subsoil with the inclusion of artificial materials or the partial covering of soil with composite materials. The most visible and impactful subtypes of soil artificialisation, namely soil sealing and soil removal, are the easiest to monitor, especially through remote sensing and machine learning. Therefore, soil sealing and soil removal should be monitored together with their effects on soil’s capacity to provide ecosystem services.

(38)

Among the land take aspects, the growth of settlement areas is a process often driven by economic development needs, which entails a land use change from natural and semi-natural areas, including protected forests, natural grasslands, peatlands, agricultural and forestry land, gardens and parks, to settlement areas, for example as part of urban development. Settlement areas, as described in Regulation (EU) 2018/841, include all developed land, namely residential, transportation, commercial and production infrastructure of any size, unless they are already included under other land use categories. Settlement areas also include soils, herbaceous perennial vegetation such as turf grass and garden plants, and trees in rural settlements, homestead gardens and urban areas. In particular, land take of agricultural land for the settlements often impacts the function of the soil as regards food provision. Such changes of land use are often a precursor to some other aspects of land take, in particular to soil sealing, and it is important to monitor such changes in order to anticipate at least part of the process of soil sealing. It is also important to note that settlements are not always fully sealed. On the contrary, a significant number of urban areas still have large amounts of soils that are not sealed, and for some urban areas that amount is more than 50 % of their surface. That indicator related to that aspect of land take alone is therefore not sufficient to fully monitor the issue of land take as a whole, as it does not differentiate between sealed soils and unsealed soils, and it renders the green areas within settlement areas invisible, making their monitoring and sustainable management more difficult.

(39)

Soils in settlement areas that are not sealed, and in densely populated urban areas in particular, are as important to monitor and manage sustainably as any other soils, as they still provide ecosystem services that are vital in maintaining a good quality of life within urban areas. A wide array of environmental issues are present and concentrated in a comparatively small surface area, in densely populated urban areas. Those issues could include, among others, a higher rate of contaminated sites due to past industrial activities, a higher risk of flooding because of soil sealing, a higher prevalence of heat islands and more limited access to green areas essential for mental and physical well-being. Soil ecosystem services provided by healthy soils in urban areas can have a very strong positive impact on a great number of people by addressing those specific issues, and their importance should not be understated. Urban green spaces, both public and private, also contribute to the ‘blue-green network’ and to biodiversity, and are a key element of other environmental policies. This is also in line with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council (18) on the restoration of urban ecosystems, which reflects the need for Member States to maintain and increase the surface area of urban green spaces.

(40)

Soil sealing and soil removal, as part of the soil artificialisation aspect of land take, are different from the growth of settlements, as they do not necessarily constitute land use change, but rather a concrete and measurable change in the soil cover and soil characteristics. Soil sealing and soil removal can cause the loss, often irreversibly, of the capacity of soils to provide vital ecosystem services, such as provision of food and biomass, water and nutrients cycling, a basis for biodiversity or carbon storage. Sealed soil also exposes human settlements to higher flood peaks and more intense heat island effects.

(41)

With regard to renewable energy sites, Member States can qualify the soil as sealed, as soil in an area that underwent soil removal or as soil that was not sealed or as soil in an area that did not undergo soil removal, depending on the type of construction. For example, solar parks could either be considered as soil sealing or not, depending on what is done with the soil at the base of the solar panels. If the soil can still sustain an ecosystem sufficiently, then solar parks are not considered soil sealing. That assessment should be made based on the impact on the soil, regardless of the purpose or appearance of the relevant construction. Inventories of areas with such types of constructions, where information on what is done with the soil at the base of such types of constructions is available, can be intersected with remote-sensing maps of soil sealing to qualify those areas as soils that are not sealed.

(42)

Mitigation is essential as regards the impact of soil sealing and soil removal in general. Therefore, it is appropriate to lay down certain principles to mitigate the impact of soil sealing and soil removal, by adopting an effort-based approach taking into account a large set of good practices aimed at minimising and offsetting the loss of soil’s capacity to provide ecosystem services. Those principles should be based on the land take hierarchy of the EU Soil Strategy for 2030, taking into account different conditions and geographical and administrative circumstances in Member States. The provisions of this Directive concerning land take do not impose new permitting procedures and should not prevent permitting of activities, including for projects of overriding public interest, and should not impinge on the spatial planning decisions that fall under the competence of national, regional or local authorities. Those principles could cover a wide array of practices such as minimising soil sealing, de-sealing and reconstructing previously sealed soils, rational densification of urbanised areas while safeguarding green spaces, including urban green spaces, and natural terrains, revitalisation of brownfields, privileging time-limited land take and performing land rehabilitation upon the termination of the land take. In order to mitigate the impact of soil sealing and soil removal as sustainably as possible, the offsetting measures, depending on the ecosystem service to be offset, might need to be geographically as close as possible to the source of the loss of the ecosystem service. Indeed, a consequence of the wrong application of those principles can be the displacement of green and high-value ecosystem areas and services far away from the areas with sealed soils, with a complete concentration of soil sealing and soil removal in the affected areas.

(43)

The soil health assessment based on the monitoring network should be accurate, while at the same time keeping the costs of such monitoring at a reasonable level. It is therefore appropriate to lay down criteria for sampling points that are representative of the soil units reflecting a certain degree of homogeneity of soil condition under different soil types, climatic conditions and land use. It is also appropriate to consider the specific situation of the Union’s outermost regions, as listed in Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which justifies providing for specific measures to support those regions. Therefore, Member States should be able to adapt, when necessary, the obligations relating to monitoring and assessment of soil health to their outermost regions’ specific characteristics. The grid of sampling points should be determined by using geostatistical methods, be based on soil units and be sufficiently dense to provide an estimation of the area of degraded soils throughout the territory of Member States, with a margin of error of not more than 5 % at the soil unit level. That value is commonly considered to provide a statistically sound estimation and reasonable assurance that the objective concerned has been achieved. The design of the sampling survey for soil monitoring should be based on the best available information on distribution of soil properties, such as information resulting from previous national or subnational surveys, relevant measurements carried out by soil managers and measurements conducted under Union and international law or specific programmes, such as the LUCAS soil campaigns or the International Cooperative Programme on Assessment and Monitoring of Air Pollution Effects on Forests (ICP Forests). Without prejudice to obligations laid down under this Directive for the management of contaminated sites, data obtained from sampling points taken during soil investigations at contaminated sites can be used for the assessment of criteria for healthy soil condition.

(44)

Soil archives store a representative subset of soil samples, which makes it possible to use one sample for various purposes, including research, thus reducing the long-term costs of in situ monitoring. In addition, soil archives make it possible to re-evaluate soil samples taken in the past in the context of the present for the purposes of an improved understanding of long-term soil change, or for other research purposes, including medical research. The Commission, including services such as the JRC, and the Member States should ensure that a representative subset of soil samples is well preserved in physical archives and remains available for further research and innovation. Where Member States undertake such archiving, a representative subset of soil samples should be stored in dedicated soil archives at least for two monitoring cycles. It should be possible for Member States to decide to transfer a representative subset of their soil samples to the Commission’s dedicated soil archive.

(45)

The Commission should assist and support Member States, at their request, in monitoring their soil health by continuing to carry out and enhancing regular in situ soil sampling and related soil measurements (LUCAS soil) as part of the LUCAS carried out in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (19). For that purpose, and subject to the agreement of Member States, LUCAS is to be enhanced and upgraded to fully align it with the specific quality requirements to be met for the purposes of this Directive. In order to alleviate the administrative and financial burden, Member States should be allowed to take into account the soil health data collected under LUCAS. Those soil health data should be made available to Member States in a timely manner. The Member States thus supported should make the necessary legal arrangements to ensure that the Commission can carry out such in situ soil sampling, including on privately owned land, and in compliance with applicable Union or national law.

(46)

The Commission is developing remote-sensing services in the context of Copernicus as a user-driven programme established by Regulation (EU) 2021/696, thereby also supporting Member States. In order to increase the timeliness and effectiveness of soil health monitoring, Member States should, where relevant, use remote-sensing data, including outputs from the Copernicus services, for the monitoring of relevant soil descriptors and soil sealing and soil removal indicators, and, if relevant, the assessment of soil health. The Commission and the EEA should support exploring possibilities with regard to, and developing, soil remote-sensing products, to assist Member States in monitoring the relevant soil descriptors and soil sealing and soil removal indicators.

(47)

Building on and upgrading the existing EU Soil Observatory, the Commission should establish a digital soil health data portal that should be compatible with the EU Data Strategy, set out in its communication of 19 February 2020 entitled ‘A European strategy for data’, and with the EU data spaces. The digital soil health data portal should be a hub providing access to soil data coming from various sources, in an aggregated form at the soil unit level or at a more detailed level if relevant, provided that it is not possible to identify the individual values or the location of the underlying georeferenced samples. That portal should primarily include all the data collected by the Member States and the Commission as required by this Directive. The processing and accessing of those data, including for scientific purposes, should comply with relevant Union law, such as Directives 2003/4/EC (20), 2007/2/EC (21), (EU) 2019/1024 (22) of the European Parliament and of the Council as well as Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 of the European Parliament and of the Council (23) and Regulation (EC) No 223/2009. Furthermore, Member States should be able to review soil health data and to request correction of any errors, before such data are made public through the digital soil health data portal. In addition, it should be possible to integrate in the portal, on a voluntary basis, other relevant soil data collected by Member States or any other party, and in particular data resulting from projects under Horizon Europe and the EU Mission ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’, provided that those data meet certain requirements as regards format and specifications. Those requirements should be specified by the Commission by way of implementing acts.

(48)

It is also necessary to improve the harmonisation of soil monitoring systems used in the Member States and exploit the synergies between Union and national monitoring systems in order to have more comparable data across the Union. It is very important to ensure the quality and comparability of soil measurements through the application of quality management system practices by the laboratories involved. To minimise the administrative burden for the laboratories, a Member State could consider it sufficient for laboratories to have one accreditation for any of the methodologies for determining the values of soil descriptors. Laboratories, or parties contracted by laboratories, performing the soil measurements should apply quality management system practices in accordance with EN ISO/IEC-17025. Equivalent quality management standards at Union or international level could be used, and, where relevant, synergies with the quality management system of ICP Forests could be sought.

(49)

It is important to use methodologies for soil testing that are certified by internationally recognised bodies, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the European Committee for Standardization (CEN), as well as acknowledged by the global research community, provided that such methodologies are available. It is also possible to use for soil testing other equivalent methodologies, namely analytical procedures that determine the same parameter or descriptor and are proven to produce identical results within the margin of their repeatability coefficient (0,95). Certification of any equivalent methodologies should also be obtained from internationally recognised bodies, such as the ISO and the CEN, and such equivalent methodologies should be acknowledged by the global research community.

(50)

In order to ensure that soils are protected from contamination by substances that have the potential to cause significant risks to human health and to contaminate surrounding air, surface waters, groundwater and subsequently oceans, policy mechanisms to detect and assess such substances of concern should be established. In that regard, an approach that allows monitoring and analysis of such substances or groups of substances via an indicative list, similar to the approach used for surface water and groundwater, should be developed regarding soil contamination. The substances or groups of substances to be placed on such indicative list should include substances posing a significant risk to soil health and soil resilience, human health or the environment, and substances for which the information available indicates that they could pose a significant risk to, or via, soil, and for which the available monitoring data are insufficient. There should be no upper limit on the number of the substances or groups of substances to be included in the indicative list of soil contaminants for the purposes of monitoring and analysis.

(51)

It is necessary to gather data on the presence of soil contaminants that could pose a risk to human health and the environment, including pesticides, their metabolites, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and other emerging soil contaminants. This Directive should therefore provide a framework to include such contaminants in an indicative list of soil contaminants for which more soil monitoring data are needed to address the risk to human health and the environment. In order to limit monitoring costs, Member States should be allowed to perform measurements on a limited number of sampling points for those contaminants. The Commission could provide support to Member States by measuring a selection of the soil contaminants from the indicative list of soil contaminants in LUCAS.

(52)

Microplastics and nanoplastics are substances that can pose a risk to soil health and also to essential activities such as agricultural production. Their presence in soils can have implications for soil fertility, thereby compromising the health and healthy development of crops. It is therefore essential that this Directive allow the inclusion of microplastics and nanoplastics in the monitoring of soil contaminants.

(53)

In order to make the widest possible use of soil health data generated by the monitoring carried out under this Directive, Member States should be required to facilitate the access to such data to the public, in an aggregated form at the soil unit level or at a more detailed level if relevant, provided that it is not possible to identify the individual values or the location of the underlying georeferenced samples. The confidential data collected by the Commission or by Member States to produce European statistics should be protected in accordance with the rules and measures of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009, in order to gain and maintain the confidence of the parties responsible for providing that information. Where the Commission or Member States produce soil health statistics, they should ensure that confidential data respect the principles of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009. Moreover, in order to protect data ownership, it is important that the Commission, the EEA or the Member States only disclose data with the consent of the data owner. In addition, Member States should communicate soil health data and the results of the soil health assessments to relevant stakeholders such as farmers, foresters, landowners and local authorities. It is important that prospective land buyers and tenants receive, in accordance with national law and upon their request, the soil health data and the results of the soil health assessments. Furthermore, soil health data made available pursuant to this Directive can be used for monitoring of soil-related aspects carried out under other Union law, where relevant.

(54)

The results of the soil health assessments carried out under this Directive will inform the process of identifying the specific practices needed to manage soil sustainably and thus the support that Member States should provide to increase soil health and soil resilience. Without prejudice to the obligations stemming from other Union and national law, the provisions of this Directive on support for soil health and soil resilience do not impose additional obligations on landowners and land managers. At the same time, soil managers, landowners, land managers and relevant authorities should receive support to improve soil health and soil resilience. That support should take the form of, inter alia: information and advice on practices that improve soil health and soil resilience, taking into consideration the local soil conditions; capacity building; promoting awareness of the benefits of practices that improve soil health and soil resilience; promoting research and innovation; assessing the technical and financial needs; and facilitating access to and uptake of available funding.

(55)

Economic instruments, including those under the CAP that provide support to farmers, have a crucial role in maintaining and improving soil health and soil resilience and, to a lesser extent, forest soils. The CAP aims to support soil health through the implementation of conditionality, eco-schemes and rural development measures. Financial support for farmers and foresters that apply practices improving soil health and soil resilience can also be generated by the private sector. For example, voluntary sustainability labels in the food, wood, bio-based and energy industries, established by private stakeholders, can take into account the contributions of farmers and foresters to improve soil health and soil resilience in accordance with this Directive. Such labels could enable food, wood and other biomass producers that follow those practices in their production to reflect them in the value of their products. Additional funding for a network of real-life sites for testing, demonstrating and upscaling of solutions, including on carbon farming, will be provided through the living labs and lighthouses of the EU Mission ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’. Without prejudice to the ‘polluter pays’ principle, support and advice should be provided by Member States to help landowners, land managers and land users affected by actions taken under this Directive, taking into account, in particular, the needs and limited capacities of small and medium-sized enterprises.

(56)

Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council (24), Member States are to describe in their CAP strategic plans how the environmental and climate architecture of those plans is intended to contribute to the achievement of, and be consistent with, the long-term national targets set out in, or deriving from, the legislative acts listed in Annex XIII to that Regulation.

(57)

Member States should be required to closely monitor the impact of the support for soil health and soil resilience, taking into account new knowledge from research and innovation. Valuable contributions are expected in this respect from the EU Mission ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’ and, in particular, its living labs and activities to support soil monitoring, soil education and citizen engagement.

(58)

Soil regeneration brings degraded soils back to a healthy condition. In the context of soil regeneration, the results of the soil health assessments can be taken into account and it is appropriate to adapt regeneration measures to the specific characteristics of the situation, type, use and condition of the soil and the local, climatic and environmental conditions. In the case of areas with soil sealing or soil removal, recovering the capacity of soils to provide ecosystem services requires first reconstructing the soil, with the aim of achieving a level of functioning of the soil and ecosystem services provision which is as close as possible to its natural functioning and its optimal level of ecosystem services provision.

(59)

To ensure synergies between the different measures adopted under other Union law that could have an impact on soil health, Member States should ensure that the activities to support soil health and soil resilience are consistent with: the national restoration plans prepared in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1991; the national biodiversity strategies and action plans established in accordance with Article 6 of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity; the CAP strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115; the codes of good agricultural practices and the action programmes for designated vulnerable zones adopted in accordance with Council Directive 91/676/EEC (25); the conservation measures and prioritised action framework established for Natura 2000 sites in accordance with Council Directive 92/43/EEC (26);the measures for achieving good ecological status and good chemical status of water bodies included in river basin management plans prepared in accordance with Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (27); the flood risk management measures established in accordance with Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (28); the drought management plans promoted in the EU Climate Adaptation Strategy; the national action programmes established in accordance with Article 10 of the UNCCD; the targets set out under Regulations (EU) 2018/841 and (EU) 2018/842 of the European Parliament and of the Council (29); the integrated national energy and climate plans established in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council (30); the national air pollution control programmes prepared under Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31); the risk assessments and disaster risk management planning established in accordance with Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (32); the national actions plans adopted in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (33) and the environmental impact assessments performed in accordance with Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (34). Activities supporting soil health and soil resilience should be, as far as possible, integrated within those programmes, codes, action frameworks, targets, plans and measures to the extent that they contribute to the achievement of their objectives. Consequently, relevant indicators and data, such as soil-related result indicators under Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 and statistical data on agricultural input and output reported under Regulation (EU) 2022/2379 of the European Parliament and of the Council (35), should be accessible to the competent authorities in order to cross-reference those data and indicators and thus make it possible to obtain the most accurate possible assessment of the effectiveness of the measures chosen.

(60)

Contaminated sites are often the legacy of decades of activities in the Union, such as industrial or military activities, and can lead to risks to human health and the environment now and in the future. It is therefore necessary first to identify and investigate potentially contaminated sites and then, in the event of confirmed contamination, to assess the risks of the contaminated site and take measures to address unacceptable risks. In this context, it is essential to also consider the impact of contaminated sites on environmental media or matrices other than soil, such as groundwater or surface water. Some of those activities, such as the use of underground storage facilities for dangerous substances, might have taken place in the bedrock or the parent material. Where such underground storage facility has leaked, contaminants might have moved into the bedrock or the parent material, and most likely they will not be found in the soil. However, the contaminants could spread and thus have an impact on human health or the environment. Therefore, if such activities are undertaken at potentially contaminated sites, the bedrock or the parent material in the vicinity of the activity will also have to be investigated to verify whether the activity has caused contamination that has an impact on human health or the environment.

(61)

Soil investigation needs to determine whether a potentially contaminated site is in fact contaminated, and whether the contamination poses a risk to human health or the environment. This Directive does not require the analysis of soil descriptors other than soil contamination as part of the soil investigation. As land use can change over time, it is important to keep information on contamination accessible to the public. For instance, where a decision has to be taken on a change of land use, it is important to evaluate whether contamination found in a past soil investigation might pose a risk to the envisaged new land use. Therefore, in order to assess whether a potentially contaminated site is in fact contaminated, the risks to human health or the environment linked to the sensitive use of the site also have to be taken into account. Sensitive uses of sites include the use of playgrounds, schools or sites used for childcare, or areas in their vicinity, the use of residential areas or the use by vulnerable populations of other areas. Where a soil investigation proves that a potentially contaminated site is in fact not contaminated, the site should no longer be considered by the Member State as potentially contaminated, unless contamination is suspected based on new evidence.

(62)

As the number of potentially contaminated sites and contaminated sites could be very high and the level of risk that a contaminated site poses can vary from very low to very high, it is appropriate to follow a risk-based and stepwise approach for identifying and investigating potentially contaminated sites and for managing contaminated sites. Such approach can enable Member States to prioritise certain sites. By prioritising certain sites, Member States can take into account the potential risk a suspected or confirmed case of contamination poses to human health and the environment, as well as the social or economic context. The evaluation of the potential risk involved in such prioritisation is much more generic than the site-specific risk assessment that is carried out on a contaminated site.

(63)

To identify potentially contaminated sites, Member States should collect evidence, including through historical research that explores information on industrial activities, incidents and accidents, using old maps, archives, press articles, environmental permits and notifications by the public or authorities and human biomonitoring or environmental monitoring data from research projects. Member States should set a list of potentially contaminating activities and be able to prioritise certain potentially contaminated sites that are most likely to pose a potential risk to human health or the environment, based on the type of activity, extent of the potential contamination, an indication that there is an immediate risk or other relevant information. As the number of potentially contaminated sites might evolve over time, a first identification of such sites should be completed within a set timeframe, based on the existing evidence, while further identification of such sites should be carried out through a systematic approach.

(64)

In order to ensure that soil investigations on potentially contaminated sites are carried out in a timely and effective manner, Member States should, in addition to the obligation to establish the timeframe within which soil investigations should be carried out, be required to identify specific events that trigger such investigations. Such triggering events could include the request for, or review of, an environmental or building permit or an authorisation required pursuant to Union or national law, soil excavation activities, land use changes, or land or real estate transactions. Soil investigations could follow different stages, such as a preliminary desk study, site-specific historic study to collect information about past industrial activities, incidents or accidents, site visit, preliminary or exploratory investigation, more detailed or descriptive investigation, and field or laboratory testing, and could include a site-specific assessment of the risks the contamination poses to human health and the environment. If contamination is found, the soil investigation should form the basis of the characterisation of the contamination and its environmental context and provide basic information for the site-specific risk assessment and the design of any risk reduction measures that might be necessary. Baseline reports and monitoring measures implemented in accordance with Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (36) could also qualify as soil investigation where appropriate.

(65)

Flexibility with regard to the management of contaminated sites is necessary to take account of costs, benefits and local specificities. Member States should therefore at least adopt a risk-based and stepwise approach for identifying and investigating potentially contaminated sites and for managing contaminated sites, taking into account the difference between those two categories and thereby enabling resources to be allocated taking account of the specific environmental, social and economic context. Decisions with regard to the management of contaminated sites, including on the risk-based and stepwise approach, should be taken based on the nature and extent of potential risks to human health, including the exposure to contaminants of vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, persons with disabilities, elderly people and children, and to the environment resulting from exposure to soil contaminants or to contaminants that migrated to the groundwater and, if possible, the cumulative effects on human health, soil ecosystems and associated ecosystem services.

(66)

Natural and anthropogenic background levels should be taken into account in the risk assessment as they could also help to set soil remediation or management objectives.

(67)

The results of the cost-benefit analysis of undertaking site-specific risk assessment or soil remediation should be positive. For instance, for small-scale contaminated sites, detailed site-specific risk assessment might be more expensive than immediate soil remediation, or the site could be clearly and seriously contaminated in such a way that a detailed site-specific risk assessment would not be necessary for the purposes of taking a decision on soil remediation. In such cases, the number of steps in the risk-based and stepwise approach for identifying and investigating potentially contaminated sites and for managing contaminated sites can be reduced since detailed site-specific risk assessment brings little added value. Member States should lay down the specific methodology for the site-specific risk assessment of contaminated sites. Member States should also determine what constitutes an unacceptable risk from a contaminated site based on scientific knowledge, the precautionary principle, local specificities, and current and planned land use.

(68)

In order to reduce to an acceptable level the risks of contaminated sites for human health and the environment, Member States should ensure that adequate risk reduction measures, including soil remediation, are taken. The optimum risk reduction measures should be sustainable and selected through a balanced decision-making process that takes account of the environmental, social and economic impact. The choice of the technique or measure depends on a combination of criteria such as the nature of the contaminants, characteristics of the soil, volume of the contamination, time and space available, budgetary constraints, soil remediation objectives, current and planned land use, and potential to improve soil health. The risk reduction measures should not have a negative impact on the risk assessment and risk management of the catchment areas for abstraction points of water intended for human consumption set out in Article 8 of Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37). As soil remediation focuses on removing the risk that soil contamination poses to human health or the environment, it might be the case that soil remediation would not improve other soil descriptors. Certain soil remediation techniques can also negatively impact soil health. Therefore, all the advantages and disadvantages of the remediation techniques should be taken into account. It should be possible to qualify measures taken under other Union law as risk reduction measures under this Directive if those measures effectively reduce risks posed by contaminated sites.

(69)

The investigation of potentially contaminated sites and the management of contaminated sites should respect the polluter pays, precautionary and proportionality principles. Member States should aim to identify the polluter and should establish a hierarchy of responsibility or decision chain of responsibility, to determine the natural or legal person responsible for bearing the costs of the soil investigation, risk assessment and the risk reduction measures. It should be possible for the Member States to decide to further distinguish between historically and newly contaminated sites and to apply a more stringent approach for contamination caused after a certain date of reference. In the case of contaminated sites for which it is not possible to identify the natural or legal person responsible for the contamination, Member States should be able to use financial instruments and Union funding programmes in order to carry out the obligations regarding soil investigation and soil remediation.

(70)

Soil contamination is already regulated under Union law such as Directives 2010/75/EU or 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (38). The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to requirements under relevant Union law.

(71)

Soil investigations, risk assessments or risk reduction measures that have been carried out on potentially contaminated sites or contaminated sites prior to 16 December 2025 and which meet the requirements set out in this Directive should be deemed appropriate to meet the requirements set out in this Directive for such sites.

(72)

Measures taken pursuant to this Directive should also take account of other Union policy objectives, such as the objectives pursued by Regulation (EU) 2024/1252 of the European Parliament and of the Council (39), namely ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials for the Union’s industries.

(73)

Transparency is an essential component of soil policy and ensures public accountability and awareness, fair market conditions and that progress can be monitored. Therefore, Member States should set up and maintain a national register of potentially contaminated sites and contaminated sites. Those registers should contain site-specific information and be made publicly accessible in the form of an online georeferenced spatial database. If registers are established at subnational level, Member States should provide for a coordinated national entry point to the different subnational registers with, for example, a centralised national website containing weblinks. The registers should contain the information that is necessary for the public to be informed of the existence of potentially contaminated sites and the management of contaminated sites. Given that the presence of soil contamination on potentially contaminated sites can, by definition, only be suspected, the difference between potentially contaminated sites and contaminated sites should be communicated and clearly explained to the public to avoid raising unnecessary concerns. Registers that exist on 16 December 2025 and that meet the requirements set out in this Directive should be deemed appropriate to meet the requirements set out in this Directive.

(74)

Article 19(1), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) requires Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection in the fields covered by Union law. In addition, in accordance with the Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (40) (the ‘Aarhus Convention’), approved by the European Community on 17 February 2005 by Council Decision 2005/370/EC (41), members of the public concerned are to have access to justice in order to contribute to the protection of the right to live in an environment which is adequate for personal health and well-being.

(75)

As clarified by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (42), Member States are not permitted to restrict legal standing to challenge a decision of a public authority to those members of the public concerned who participated in the decision-making procedure which led to the adoption of that decision. In addition, any review procedure should be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and provide for adequate remedies, including injunctive relief as appropriate. Furthermore, in line with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (43), access to justice is as a minimum to be granted to the public concerned.

(76)

Directive (EU) 2019/1024 mandates the release of public sector information in free and open formats. The overall objective of Directive (EU) 2019/1024 is to continue the strengthening of the Union’s data economy by increasing the amount of interoperable public sector data available for reuse, ensuring fair competition and easy access to public sector information, and enhancing cross-border innovation based on data. The main principle of that Directive is that government data should be open by default and design. Directive 2003/4/EC is aimed at guaranteeing the right of access to environmental information in the Member States in line with the Aarhus Convention. The Aarhus Convention and Directive 2003/4/EC encompass broad obligations related both to making environmental information available upon request and actively disseminating such information. Directive 2003/4/EC provides for a restricted list of exemptions from dissemination or disclosure of environmental information, taking into account the public interest served by the dissemination, in the event that the dissemination or disclosure of the information would adversely affect certain interests. Such interests include: public security or national defence; the confidentiality of commercial or industrial information where such confidentiality is provided for by Union or national law to protect a legitimate economic interest, including the public interest in maintaining statistical confidentiality and tax secrecy; and the confidentiality of personal data or files relating to a natural person where that person has not consented to the disclosure of the information to the public, where such confidentiality is provided for by Union or national law. Directive 2007/2/EC is also of broad scope, covering the sharing of spatial information, including data sets on different environmental topics. It is important that the provisions of this Directive related to access to information and data-sharing arrangements complement Directives (EU) 2019/1024, 2003/4/EC and 2007/2/EC and do not create a separate legal regime. Therefore, the provisions of this Directive regarding information to the public and information on monitoring of implementation should be without prejudice to those Directives.

(77)

It is also important that the provisions of this Directive related to data-sharing arrangements enable Member States to reuse existing data infrastructures established pursuant to Directives (EU) 2019/1024 and 2007/2/EC to ensure there is an effective and timely exchange of information. For that purpose, the Member States and the Commission could make use of tools such as REPORTNET managed by the EEA. That approach follows the ‘once-only’ principle and avoids imposing an additional burden on the Member States to set up a dedicated data infrastructure under this Directive.

(78)

In order to ensure the necessary adaptation of the rules on soil health monitoring and management of contaminated sites, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of amending this Directive to adapt to scientific and technical progress the methodologies for monitoring soil health, the indicative list of risk reduction measures and the phases and principles for the site-specific risk assessment. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making (44). In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

(79)

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in order to set formats or methods for sharing or collecting soil health data and for integrating those data in the digital soil health data portal and to set out the format, structure and detailed arrangements for reporting data and information electronically to the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council (45).

(80)

To support Member States in carrying out their obligations under this Directive, the Commission should, in cooperation with the Member States and other stakeholders, where relevant, draw up documents and develop scientific tools, including possible methodologies and procedures that could be applied. Those documents and scientific tools would provide in due time essential information for Member States, while ensuring the flexibility to build on methodologies and procedures already in place. Those documents and scientific tools should be complemented with the necessary assistance and capacity building. The Commission should provide to Member States the necessary capacity building and assistance and support multilateral harmonisation of methods, and thereby eliminate existing data gaps and workflow bottlenecks by sharing expertise. To that end, the Commission should build on existing mechanisms at Union and international level, including the Soil BON initiative, Global Soil Partnership, SOILveR, NICOLE, EUROSOLAN, the EU Mission’s ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’ Mirror Groups and EIONET. The Commission should support cross-border cooperation between Member States to ensure that a harmonised approach to soil monitoring is taken and that there is a level playing field between neighbouring soil districts.

(81)

In addition to drawing up documents and developing scientific tools, the Commission should organise regular exchanges of information, experience and best practices on the application of this Directive between Member States and, where relevant, other stakeholders. Such exchanges of information could, in addition, provide the opportunity for the discussion on: communication to the public of the results of the soil health assessments; practices that improve soil resilience; contamination other than anthropogenic point-source contamination; application of the hierarchy of responsibility determining the party or parties responsible for the management of contaminated sites; orphan site management; soil remediation techniques for contaminated sites; identification and evaluation of natural and anthropogenic background levels; approaches for the identification of areas where individual criteria for healthy soil condition are not satisfied; quality management system practices for laboratories; and land take mitigation principles.

(82)

By 17 June 2033, the Commission should carry out an evidence-based evaluation and, where relevant, a revision of this Directive, on the basis of the results of the soil health assessments. That evaluation should assess in particular the need to set more specific requirements to ensure that the objectives of this Directive are achieved. That evaluation should also assess the need to adapt to scientific and technical progress the definition of healthy soils by adding provisions on certain soil descriptors or criteria for healthy soil condition based on new scientific evidence relating to the protection of soils or on the grounds of a problem specific to a Member State arising from new environmental or climatic circumstances. In accordance with paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making, that evaluation is to be based on the criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of options for further action.

(83)

Coordinated measures by all Member States are necessary to achieve the vision of all soils being healthy by 2050 and to secure the provision of ecosystem services by soils across the Union in the long term. Individual actions of Member States have proven to be insufficient since soil degradation is continuing and even increasing. Since the objectives of this Directive cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

(84)

The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council (46) and delivered an opinion on 11 December 2023.

(85)

In accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents (47), Member States have undertaken to accompany, in justified cases, the notification of their transposition measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition instruments. With regard to this Directive, the legislator considers the transmission of such documents to be justified,