‘Personal freedom’ vs ‘greater good’: Low emission zones show EU’s impact on our everyday lives
The European elections are ap‐ proaching and with them the usual hand-wringing about a lack of in‐ terest from the electorate.
The European Union is a behe‐ moth, involved in so many things that even the biggest political enthusiasts find it difficult to keep track.
In the lead-up to June’s elections, expect to see slick campaigns from the institutions and politicians mak‐ ing speeches telling you why you should vote.
But sometimes, breaking down a simple example can be the most ef‐ fective way to highlight the EU’s im‐ pact on our lives.
What are low emission zones?
One example of an EU initiative that affects the majority of Europeans can be found in the transport and organi‐ sation of our cities.
If you’ve travelled through Europe in recent years it’s likely you’ve come across brightly coloured circular stickers on car windshields.
The small vignettes are becoming increasingly common and show the environmental status of a vehicle to prove that the owner has permission to drive in the area.
They’re a part of low emission zone schemes that aim to keep the most polluting cars out of the city to improve air quality. Usually, this is done by charging a fee for these vehi‐ cles (which are mostly older cars) to enter or just banning them outright.
Many of these zones are funded by the EU and have come as a conse‐ quence of EU legislation.
Some newly right-wing run cities in Spain adopt pro-car policies
Why are low emission zones con‐ troversial in Europe?
Low emissions zones have also be‐ come a political battleground in some member states with ‘personal free‐ dom’ pitted against the ‘common good’.
“The narrative has been hijacked,” says Carmen Duce, the Spanish coor‐ dinator of the Clean Cities Campaign.
She says despite opposition, the science is clear - people’s quality of life can be improved by low emission zones.
Air pollution is killing thousands of people every year
97 per cent of EU citizens living in ur‐ ban areas are exposed to air pollution above World Health Organisation’s guidelines.
Speaking at a conference on healthy cities in Brussels last week, Zorana Jovanovic Andersen, a profes‐ sor of environmental epidemiology at the University of Copenhagen, laid bare the health impacts of this situa‐ tion.
These European cities are doing the most to fight air pollution Low emissions traffic schemes linked to cleaner air
Over 300,000 premature deaths are caused by air pollution in Europe every year. Poor air quality is also re‐ sponsible for 20-25 per cent of cardio‐ vascular disease deaths and 10 per cent of lung cancer cases.
That’s before examining its links to brain inflammation and the fastgrowing evidence between poor men‐ tal health and bad air quality.
On top of that, one of the most af‐ fected groups is older people so an ageing population is a vulnerable
population.
Given these health and environ‐ mental impacts the EU has been continuously legislating in the area.
This is where we can begin to make the link between legislation and regulation at an EU level with its im‐ pact on everyday life.
How does the EU make legisla‐ tion?
The bloc introduced its first air quality directive to tackle the issue in 1980. Over the years, subsequent directives have been introduced to address ad‐ ditional pollutants and to update and strengthen air quality standards and monitoring requirements, including a new version passed just last week.
Directives set certain legally bind‐ ing end goals or targets, but member states have flexibility on how they achieve them.
It’s through these laws that limits on pollutants have been set.
Member states played a role in ne‐ gotiating the recent version a er it was first suggested by the European Commission. The European Parlia‐ ment was also involved in the pro‐ cess.
Once directives are adopted, member states are obliged to take the rules and make them part of their own national laws, put them into ac‐ tion, ensure that they are complying and report back to the EU on how they’ve implemented the directive.
In the case of low emission zones, they became part of many of the air quality plans that member states have been obliged to create as the bloc attempts to tackle pollution.
Why is a Spanish city dismantling cycle lanes?
Spain is one country that has really leaned into the measure as a way to combat pollution. In a bid to keep within EU targets, it passed a climate law in 2021 that made it obligatory for every city with over 50,000 inhabitants to introduce a low emission zone.
The country received €1.5 billion in EU funding to help with the imple‐ mentation of these zones and the sus‐ tainable transformation of trans‐ portation.
But it has not been an easy road. Most cities have still not complied despite funding threats and some municipalities are slamming the brakes on their plans. One has even gone so far as to dismantle recently installed cycle paths to better accom‐ modate cars. This has led the Euro‐ pean Commission to open a prelimi‐ nary investigation into the potential misuse of funds.
“The right and the far right are us‐ ing the car as a symbol of their under‐ standing of freedom,” Duce claims.
Resistance is not just a Spanish phenomenon, however. There have also been protests about the intro‐ duction of low emissions zones in Bel‐ gium and Germany.
Opponents say that the fines will hit the poorest the hardest and that the zones are an attack on personal freedoms.
In a way, it’s a microcosm of the backlash to the European Green Deal as the continent gears up for the Eu‐ ropean elections.
While people will continue to ar‐ gue the case for and against low emission zones, their implementation is a clear example of the influence the EU can have at a national, local and personal level.