Environmental responsibility is a priority area of EU policy to protect biodiversity, water and soil. Directive 2004/35/EC entered into force From 1^η May 2007 and established a regime for environmental liability by requiring operators of activities listed in Annex III to the Directive to make good any damage caused by the pursuit of their activities. The ELD is based on the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle. The precautionary principle requires operators to take measures to address imminent threats, such as preventive measures. In the event of environmental damage, the operator will have to pay for remedial measures, which may involve high costs.

According to the Regulatory Fitness and Performance (REFIT) programme, the ELD was expected to lead to a higher degree of environmental protection in the EU, but performance is not yet satisfactory compared to initial expectations and there is a wide variation between Member States (MS). The Commission and Member States have been working since 2017 on the multi-annual programme to improve the evidence base and promote the availability of reliable and adequate financial security. Some Member States (such as Spain, Ireland, the Netherlands) have developed different methodologies for financial security to help operators meet their environmental obligations. All three methodologies share a common basis, i.e. they cover soil and water remediation. The Irish and Spanish methodologies are based on a risk assessment approach (IMPEL report).

The Directive was incorporated into Greek legislation by Presidential Decree 148 of 2009, which established the competent national and regional authorities (i.e. the Coordinating Office for the Implementation of Environmental Liability (SEAGAPEZ) and the Regional Environmental Damage Mitigation Committees (RECs)). According to PD 148/2009, it is foreseen that financial security for operators is mandatory and a Ministerial Decision (MC) is expected to be issued, which will define the relevant procedure and requirements. The draft IA based on the environmental risk assessment according to the categorisation of activities is currently under consultation with stakeholders. One of the main challenges that LIFE PROFILE will address is the lack of a commonly accepted methodology for assessing environmental risks according to the type of activity and assessing the level of sufficient guarantees to reduce uncertainty and promote economic and realistic financial security schemes

In 2019 it was estimated that a small number of around 200 activities in Greece had financial security, mainly related to hazardous waste management (also covered by Annex III of the ELD).

In 2021 this number increased to about 3,300 mainly due to the new legislation (Law 4685/2020 and Law 4819/2021) according to which financial security is mandatory for activities in the hazardous and non-hazardous waste management sectors. However, any activity under Annex III of Directive 2004/35/EC may cause environmental damage and there is a strong need to use financial security, as in its absence and taking into account the risk of the operator's inability to bear the full cost of remediation (including through insolvency or dissolution), the competent authorities may ultimately bear the costs involved.

Therefore, LIFE PROFILE will make a substantial contribution through the development of a risk assessment tool that is reliable and available to operators, ensuring fair sharing of the costs of liability for environmental damage to soil, water and biodiversity. Incorporating this tool into legislation in an effective way would further strengthen the implementation of the Environmental Liability Directive.

In addition, the use of financial security is expected to improve the environmental performance and compliance of Annex III activities, as the environmental audit carried out by the operator will be a prerequisite for the provision of the appropriate financial security scheme. SYGAPEZ maintains a Register of ELD cases. For the period 2013-2021, 201 cases have been registered (92 cases related to water damage, 36 cases related to damage to natural habitats and protected species and 117 cases related to damage to soil).

The data show that a large number of operators liable to pay do not implement the remedial measures imposed (e.g. for reasons of insolvency), putting the environment and public health at risk. In such a case, public authorities may bear the costs of remediation using public resources (e.g. the Green Fund).

The implementation of a proper financial security system is therefore a solution with a significant impact on the response to such cases. Although various forms of financial security (e.g. insurance, bonds, guarantees) are used in Member States as a means of environmental remediation, they have so far not been widely implemented at national level and operators are reluctant to obtain financial security. Considering that risk assessment to develop appropriate financial security for operators is a complex and multidisciplinary task and that its full implementation requires the positive attitude of all stakeholders, its successful implementation is a challenge. Therefore, it is absolutely essential to provide for awareness raising of all stakeholders, targeted capacity building, optimisation of stakeholder cooperation, data sharing and provision of access to stakeholders and the public.