OECD environmental performance reviews. Belgium 2021.

209 Pages·2021·5.147 MB·English

by  Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,

OECD Environmental Performance Reviews
BELGIUM
2021

OECD Environmental
Performance Reviews:
Belgium
2021
This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over
any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of
such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in
the West Bank under the terms of international law.
Note by Turkey
The information in this document with reference to “Cyprus” relates to the southern part of the Island. There is no single
authority representing both Turkish and Greek Cypriot people on the Island. Turkey recognises the Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Until a lasting and equitable solution is found within the context of the United Nations, Turkey
shall preserve its position concerning the “Cyprus issue”.
Note by all the European Union Member States of the OECD and the European Union
The Republic of Cyprus is recognised by all members of the United Nations with the exception of Turkey. The
information in this document relates to the area under the effective control of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus.
Please cite this publication as:
OECD (2021), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Belgium 2021, OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, OECD
Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/738553c5-en.
ISBN 978-92-64-41981-0 (print)
ISBN 978-92-64-40034-4 (pdf)
OECD Environmental Performance Reviews
ISSN 1990-0104 (print)
ISSN 1990-0090 (online)
Photo credits: Cover © Thomas Dekiere/Shutterstock.com; Khaled Louis Fazely/Shutterstock.com.
Corrigenda to publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/about/publishing/corrigenda.htm.
© OECD 2021
The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.
 3
Foreword
The principal aim of the OECD Environmental Performance Review programme is to help member and
selected partner countries improve their individual and collective performance in environmental
management by:
 helping individual governments assess progress in achieving their environmental goals
 promoting continuous policy dialogue and peer learning
 stimulating greater accountability from governments towards each other and public opinion.
This report reviews the environmental performance of Belgium since the previous review in 2007. Progress
in achieving domestic objectives and international commitments provides the basis for assessing the
country’s environmental performance. Such objectives and commitments may be broad aims, qualitative
goals or quantitative targets. A distinction is made between intentions, actions and results. Assessment of
environmental performance is also placed within the context of Belgium’s historical environmental record,
present state of the environment, physical endowment in natural resources, economic conditions and
demographic trends.
The OECD is indebted to the government of Belgium for its co-operation in providing information, for the
organisation of the virtual review mission (10-12 June 2020), and for facilitating contacts both inside and
outside government institutions.
Thanks are also due to the representatives of the two examining countries, Thomas Pedersen (Denmark)
and Jurgita Gaižiūnienė (Lithuania).
The authors of this report were, Gérard Bonnis, Eugene Mazur, Sarah Miet, Frédérique Zegel (OECD
Environment Directorate) and Tony Zamparutti (consultant), under the co-ordination of Frédérique Zegel.
Nathalie Girouard and Frédérique Zegel provided oversight and guidance. Carla Bertuzzi and Sarah Miet
provided statistical support, Annette Hardcastle and Shellie Phillips provided administrative support and
Mark Foss copy-edited the report. Natasha Cline-Thomas provided communications support. Preparation
of this report also benefited from inputs and comments from several members of the OECD Secretariat,
including Müge Adalet McGowan, Aimee Aguilar Jaber, Brilé Anderson, Nils Axel Braathen, Tomasz
Kozluk and Kurt van Dender, as well as Divya Reddy of the International Energy Agency.
The OECD Working Party on Environmental Performance discussed the draft Environmental Performance
Review of Belgium at its meeting on 8 December 2020 and approved the Assessment and
Recommendations.
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021
4 
Table of contents
Foreword 3
Reader’s guide 8
Abbreviations and acronyms 9
Basic statistics of Belgium 12
Executive summary 13
Assessment and recommendations 17
1.1. Environmental performance: Trends and recent developments 18
1.2. Environmental governance and management 23
1.3. Towards green growth 26
1.4. Biodiversity 31
1.5. Waste, materials management and the circular economy 35
References 39
Notes 41
Annex 1.A. Actions taken to implement selected recommendations from the 2007 OECD
Environmental Performance Review of Belgium 42
Part I. Progress towards sustainable development 47
1. Environmental performance: Trends and recent developments 48
1.1. Introduction 49
1.2. Main economic and social developments 49
1.3. Transition to an energy-efficient and low-carbon economy 53
1.4. Atmospheric emissions and air quality 61
1.5. Transition to efficient resource management 65
1.6. Land use and natural resource management 66
References 75
Notes 78
2. Environmental governance and management 80
2.1. Introduction 81
2.2. Institutional framework for environmental governance 81
2.3. Setting of regulatory requirements 82
2.4. Compliance assurance 85
2.5. Promoting environmental democracy 92
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021
 5
References 96
Notes 97
3. Towards green growth 98
3.1. Introduction 99
3.2. Ensuring a strong, resilient and green economic recovery 99
3.3. Enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development 100
3.4. Greening the tax system 103
3.5. Investing in the environment and low-carbon infrastructure to promote green growth 113
3.6. Promoting eco-innovation and green markets 118
References 123
Note 126
Part II. Progress towards selected environmental objectives 127
4. Biodiversity 128
Introduction 129
Institutional and policy framework 129
State, pressures and trends 130
Policy mix 137
Mainstreaming biodiversity in other policies 142
References 161
Notes 165
5. Waste, materials management and the circular economy 168
5.1. Introduction 169
5.2. Trends in material consumption and waste management 169
5.3. Objectives, policies and institutions for waste, materials management and the circular
economy 176
5.4. Promoting waste reduction and recycling 181
5.5. Promoting the circular economy 192
References 202
Notes 206

Tables
Table 1.1. Belgium is not on track to reach SDG targets by 2030 50
Table 1.2. Belgium’s objectives, targets and contributions under the Governance Regulation 53
Table 1.3. Belgium national and regional emission ceilings and objectives 63
Table 4.1. Financial incentives increase with the level of nature protection in Flanders 134
Table 4.2. A fairly diverse set of biodiversity policy instruments but few payments for ecosystem services 138
Table 4.3. Nature-based solutions to environmental and well-being challenges in Flanders 141
Table 4.4. Each region has its own spatial planning instruments 143
Table 4.5. Spatial planning in Brussels-Capital regulates green spaces beyond just protected areas 144
Table 4.6. Spatial planning policy has weakened in Wallonia 147
Table 4.7. Half of the Belgian rural development policy budget is devoted to the environment and climate 150
Table 4.8. The national pesticides action plan addresses the protection of wildlife 157
Table 5.1. Belgium has met the EU’s 2020 recycling targets, but performance on key regional targets has
varied 177
Table 5.2. Incineration and landfill taxes for municipal solid waste in Belgium, France and the Netherlands 184
Table 5.3. Belgium has already met many of the EU’s 2025 and 2030 targets for packaging waste recycling 187
Table 5.4. Belgium has met EU collection rate targets for several key waste streams 189
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021
6 

Figures
Figure 1. Selected environmental performance indicators 19
Figure 2. Effective tax rates on CO2 emissions are low, especially in non-road sectors 27
Figure 3. The status of habitats and species is of concern 31
Figure 4. Material productivity improved and landfilling has fallen further 35
Figure 1.1. Economic activity grew faster in Flanders than in Wallonia and the Brussels-Capital Region 49
Figure 1.2. The Flemish Region performs better than others on most well-being dimensions 52
Figure 1.3. Fossil fuels and nuclear dominate the energy mix 54
Figure 1.4. Renewable sources increased, but they remain low 55
Figure 1.5 Industry, transport and buildings consume the most energy 56
Figure 1.6. Road transport is increasing 57
Figure 1.7. Transport, buildings and industry are the main sources of GHG emissions 59
Figure 1.8. Belgium is not on track to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 60
Figure 1.9. Belgium is on track to meet its 2030 air pollutant emission reduction objectives 63
Figure 1.10. Nitrogen and phosphorus balances are high 68
Figure 1.11. Most freshwater abstractions are used to produce electricity 71
Figure 1.12. Belgium has a long way to go to achieve the targets of good status for water bodies 73
Figure 2.1. Non-compliance is declining in the Flemish Region 86
Figure 2.2. The use of administrative fines is rising in the Brussels-Capital Region 88
Figure 3.1. Natural capital is deteriorating 102
Figure 3.2. Environmentally related tax revenue is below the OECD Europe average 104
Figure 3.3. Revenue from energy taxes has been increasing with diesel taxation 105
Figure 3.4. Taxes on diesel and petrol were aligned in 2019 106
Figure 3.5. Effective tax rates on CO2 emissions are low, especially in non-road sectors 107
Figure 3.6. Support to fossil fuel consumption: Tax expenditure increased with diesel taxes 109
Figure 3.7. Households have contributed an increasing share of energy-related tax revenue 112
Figure 3.8. Public expenditure for environmental protection increased with support to sustainable energy 114
Figure 3.9. Industrial investment for environmental protection increased significantly 114
Figure 3.10. Investment needs in sustainable energy and mobility are high 115
Figure 3.11. Investment in rail has shifted to road 117
Figure 3.12. Government R&D budget on environment decreased, while energy RD&D budget targets mostly
nuclear 119
Figure 3.13. Belgium has specialised in waste management technology 120
Figure 3.14. Waste management is an important sector, but circular economy has room for development 121
Figure 4.1. A significant number of species are threatened 130
Figure 4.2. Protected areas have increased 131
Figure 4.3. Environmental provisions of the EU Common Agricultural Policy 148
Figure 4.4. Three-quarters of Belgian forests are in Wallonia 153
Figure 5.1. Material productivity improved as consumption of construction materials declined 170
Figure 5.2. Material productivity is above the OECD Europe average 170
Figure 5.3. Construction generated one-third of total waste in 2018 and has grown since 2010 171
Figure 5.4. Municipal waste generation is low 172
Figure 5.5. Belgium recovers, recycles and composts nearly all of its municipal waste 173
Figure 5.6. Public investment for waste management has fluctuated, but local governments have remained the
main investors 174
Figure 5.7. Both imports and exports of hazardous waste have remained fairly stable since 2010 175
Figure 5.8. Exports of paper and cardboard waste declined, but exports of plastic scrap grew 176
Figure 5.9. Responsibilities for waste management and the circular economy across federal, regional and
local levels 180
Figure 5.10. Belgium’s different levels of government have launched a range of circular economy initiatives 193

Boxes
Box 1. Recommendations on climate change and water management 22
Box 2. Recommendations on environmental governance and management 25
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021
 7
Box 3. Recommendations on green growth 30
Box 4. Recommendations on biodiversity 34
Box 5. Recommendations on waste, materials management and the circular economy 38
Box 2.1. Developing sustainable neighbourhoods in Brussels 85
Box 2.2. The BCR Inspection Code represents a good tool for proportionate enforcement 87
Box 2.3. Brussels-Capital uses a variety of financial tools to clean-up contaminated sites 90
Box 2.4. Green Deals promote sustainability and good management in Flanders 91
Box 3.1. Lessons learnt from past green stimulus packages in OECD countries 100
Box 3.2. Reviving inter-governmental co-operation after the 2017 National Sustainable Development Strategy 101
Box 3.3. Belgium is a frontrunner in measuring well-being’s sustainability 102
Box 3.4. The National Debate has identified options for carbon pricing and should be followed up 108
Box 4.1. The Sonian forest: An example of regional co-operation 132
Box 4.2. Using rivers as biodiversity corridors 135
Box 4.3. The Danish tax on pesticides 158
Box 4.4. Belgium pays special attention to pollinators 158
Box 5.1. Regional differences for end-of-waste criteria hinder the circular economy 179
Box 5.2. The Brussels-Capital Region encourages zero waste lifestyles 182
Box 5.3. Taxes have almost eliminated landfilling but have not led to a shift from incineration to recycling 184
Box 5.4. Belgium can consider European good practices to address problems with ELV collection 188
Box 5.5. The Brussels Good Soil Strategy addresses soil sealing and soil health 190
Box 5.6. Flanders has set targets to remove high-risk asbestos in buildings 191
Box 5.7. Resource constraints limit inspections in the Port of Antwerp 192
Box 5.8. Flanders has developed IT tools to reduce waste and support circularity 194
Box 5.9. Flanders has promoted circular purchasing in both enterprises and government 196

OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021
8 

Reader’s guide
Signs
The following signs are used in figures and tables:
.. : not available
_ : nil or negligible
. : decimal point
Country aggregates
OECD Europe: This zone includes all European member countries of the OECD, i.e. Austria, Belgium, the
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
OECD: This zone includes all member countries of the OECD, i.e. the countries of OECD Europe plus
Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Israel*, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand and the United States.
Country aggregates may include Secretariat estimates.
This publication presents EU aggregates that predate the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European
Union on 1 February 2020. Therefore, the EU aggregates presented here refer to the European Union
including the United Kingdom, unless otherwise stated.
Costa Rica was not an OECD member at the time this publication was prepared. Accordingly, Costa Rica
does not appear in the list of OECD members and is not included in the zone aggregates.
Currency
Monetary unit: Euro (EUR)
In 2019, USD 1 = EUR 0.893
In 2018, USD 1 = EUR 0.847
Cut-off date
This report is based on information and data available up to December 2020.
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: BELGIUM 2021 © OECD 2021