A Commission staff working document published on 17 July 2026 evaluates Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability (ELD), concluding that while the directive has contributed to preventing and remedying environmental damage, its effectiveness is limited by inconsistent implementation across Member States and challenges in proving causation. The evaluation, which covers the ELD's effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, EU added value, and relevance, notes significant differences in implementation efficiency between Member States and assesses the current non-compulsory approach to financial security for ELD liabilities as appropriate.
The ELD, which establishes a framework for environmental liability based on the polluter-pays principle, has been in force for over two decades. The evaluation finds that the directive is internally consistent and coherent with other EU environmental legislation and wider EU policies, and confirms its EU added value compared to what Member States could achieve alone. However, the interaction between the ELD and national environmental legislation has affected its implementation, leading to uneven application across the bloc. The document also assesses the costs and benefits of the directive, highlighting that while the ELD has brought environmental benefits, the administrative and compliance costs vary widely among Member States.
The evaluation concludes that the ELD remains relevant, but its scope may need to adapt to new and emerging environmental issues, such as those related to climate change and biodiversity loss. The Commission's findings suggest that while the directive has been partially effective, there is room for improvement in implementation consistency and adaptation to new challenges. The document does not propose specific legislative changes but serves as a basis for future policy discussions. Stakeholders, including EU producers and operators in sectors such as waste management, chemicals, and energy, may face continued uncertainty regarding liability rules, while national authorities could see pressure to harmonise enforcement practices. Environmental NGOs may view the evaluation as a call for stronger liability provisions, particularly for emerging risks. The Commission is expected to consider the evaluation's findings in any future revision of the ELD.