Fundamental rights and housing in the EU’s climate and energy transition
Search inside this publication
-
Key findings and FRA opinions
- Integrating fundamental rights into the climate and energy transition
- Strengthening fundamental rights safeguards in designing and implementing energy renovation policies
- The lack of equal access to renovation measures impacts the right to housing
- Protecting the rights of tenants in energy renovations
- People confronted with housing deprivation are at risk of being left behind in the climate and energy transition
- Participation and stakeholder engagement in the energy transition is often a one-off exercise and is not inclusive
- Lack of transparency and information for complaint mechanisms hinder access to justice
- Need for integrated and systematic monitoring and data collection for a just climate and energy transition
- Introduction
-
1. Access to energy and the right to housing in the climate and energy transition
- 1.1 International framework on access to affordable and sustainable energy
- 1.2 The link between the right to housing and sustainability
- 1.3 Energy as an essential service in the European Union’s framework
- 1.4 Energy renovations for achieving affordable and sustainable housing in the European Union
- 1.5 Conclusion
- 2. Fundamental rights in the European Union climate and energy governance
- 3. Non-discrimination and leaving no one behind in the energy transition
- 4. Participation and stakeholder engagement in the energy transition
- 5. Accountability: effective structures for fundamental-rights-compliant energy policy implementation
- Conclusions
- Annex 1 – Methodology
- Acronyms and abbreviations
- About this publication
When implementing EU law, Member States have legal obligations to ensure access to services of general interest (Article 36 of the Charter) and to guarantee a high level of environmental protection (Article 191 TFEU) to everyone on their territory and may be held accountable if they fail to meet these obligations.
Article 41 of the Charter enshrines the right to good administration by EU institutions. The CJEU has recognised it as a general principle of EU law that is also applicable to Member States when implementing EU law, as regards the obligation for administrations to provide reasons for their decisions [6]
See Joined Cases C-225/19 and C-226/19, Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, paragraph 34 and C-230/18 PI, paragraph 57.
. The Charter also guarantees the right to an effective remedy (Article 47). The availability of complaint mechanisms – administrative decision review and other non-judicial forms – are important for the realisation of the right to access remedy and complement available judicial review avenues. At the same time, it is important that the complaint mechanisms and the judicial procedures are accessible in practice: supporting measures and the access to information play a particularly important role to ensure effective access to justice.
This chapter outlines governance and accountability structures and elements that contribute to the effective and fundamental-rights-compliant implementation of energy renovation programmes.
Energy transition programmes require financial investments, which are supported by EU funds. The availability of sufficient financial resources plays a crucial role in the energy transition and establishing climate efficient housing. As highlighted in FRA’s report EU funds –Ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, all EU funds must be spent in a way that respects fundamental rights. Eight funds governed by the Common Provisions Regulation must comply with explicitly defined fundamental rights standards. FRA indicated that fundamental-rights-enabling conditions should be applicable to all EU funds, including the Social Climate Fund and NextGenerationEU Fund, as one of the ways forward to strengthen the fundamental-rights-compliant EU green transition.
Of the 10 programmes analysed, 5 were fully or partially financed from EU funds – including in Czechia (RRF and Modernisation Fund), Estonia (Cohesion Fund and the Just Transition Fund), Greece (RRF), Poland (RRF and the European Funds for Infrastructure, Climate, Environment 2021–2027), and Spain (technical assistance provided within the EPAH initiative of the European Commission). Almost all of them lack explicit fundamental rights conditionalities or specific objectives or targets related to a socially just transition, with the exception of the Estonian programme which explicitly incorporates accessibility-related objectives (albeit limited, see Chapter 3). Notably, this is also the only programme in the sample financed from the EU funds governed by the Common Provisions Regulation.
Other programmes are funded from Member States’ own national and regional budgets, and subject to different funding rules and formats. Some of the 10 programmes target specific groups in vulnerable situations (as described in Chapter 3 above). However, none of the programmes include explicit fundamental rights conditionalities. They also do not define specific social indicators (see also Chapter 5.2).
Research also revealed negative and inadvertent side effects of some of the energy renovation programmes, for example, inflated market prices for construction materials and services, or unfair practices by private enterprises participating in the programmes. Interviewees further pointed to controversies in programmes, fraud attempts and misconduct in several countries, potentially impacting on the right to housing and accessing affordable and sustainable energy.
Timely and comprehensive monitoring is a key element to take account of the progress towards achieving the climate targets of Member States and to tailor measures to specific needs for different groups and regions in a fundamental-rights-compliant manner. Monitoring progress and compliance with fundamental rights and gathering respective data is one of the principles of a HRBA. It is also in line with the better regulation guidelines (2023) that call for evidence-based lawmaking and monitoring implementation of EU legislation. The FRA report Towards a fundamental-rights-compliant European Green Deal stresses that there is currently ‘no comprehensive monitoring framework to evaluate the impact of environmental factors or policies on fundamental rights, which could be applied to assess the just transition.’ This is still the case.
Human rights indicators are essential in the implementation of human rights standards and commitments, to support policy formulation, impact assessment and transparency.
At the EU level, there are a number of monitoring mechanisms and indicators to track the progress on the implementation of the European Green Deal and related policies (Table 7).
Table 7 – EU monitoring mechanisms and indicators related to the Green Deal and its social impact
|
Policy/legislative file |
Monitoring framework / indicators |
|
Governance Regulation |
|
|
European Climate Law and European Green Deal |
|
|
European semester |
Scoreboard (macroeconomic imbalance) |
|
European Pillar of Social Rights |
|
|
Recovery and Resilience Facility |
|
|
UN SDGs |
|
|
EU and national voluntary reviews |
|
|
EPAH |
Source: FRA.
However, the analysis shows that the different databases are often not interlinked, making it difficult or impossible monitor the impact of climate change mitigation on fundamental rights and socioeconomic living conditions.
For example, the Green Deal dashboard includes only one indicator related to energy poverty – the population unable to keep their homes adequately warm – disaggregated for country and low-income groups. While data for age, gender and disability are available for all EU-27 countries, these are not integrated or displayed in the dashboard. FRA data on Roma, Travellers, immigrants and descendants of immigrants show significantly higher rates of energy poverty among these groups than in the general population (see also Chapter 3). Few other indicators within the 8th Environment Action Programme dashboard provide insights on the environmental risks and impacts on individuals, such as the EEA indicator on environmental inequality which monitors the PM2.5 levels (concentration of fine particulate matter in the air, WHO air quality guidelines) in relation to income and regions. The data show a 30 % higher exposure for the lowest income quintile in comparison with the highest income quintile, highlighting the persisting environmental inequalities and exposures – as air pollution is linked to significant environmental health risks and associated with an increased number of premature deaths. While the Recovery and Resilience Facility includes both green transition and social and territorial cohesion among its six pillars, the related targets and indicators are reported on separately.
Although there is clear evidence of the unequal impact of environmental, climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, there is also a persistent lack of data disaggregation to capture the impact on those in vulnerable situations. The absence of integrated and systematic monitoring of a just transition, including the impact on socioeconomic conditions and fundamental rights is observed at all stages, at the EU, national and local levels, in programmes and projects. A Belgian policy paper on a just transition towards climate neutrality recognises that the monitoring of the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights uses a robust set of social indicators, while operating independently from the monitoring of climate policy, and recommends the creation of an EU Just Transition Scoreboard.
A 2024 JRC report, based on an analysis of household surveys, suggests an analytical framework to monitor energy justice, focusing on wellbeing impacts rather than only on energy poverty. It calls for broader socio-technical factors and context to be taken into account when designing projects and funds.
The Governance Regulation requires Member States to regularly report on their progress in biannual NECPRs (see Chapter 2). The 2023 Commission assessment shows that monitoring the impact of policies and measures in regard to reaching the climate targets is limited: while all Member States reported on progress, the information provided was often insufficient to provide a collective EU assessment. The topics and indicators cover primarily technical targets on greenhouse gas emissions reduction, energy efficiency and security, achieving an interconnected internal energy market, along with research and innovation.
The fieldwork research in 10 selected Member States shows that in all countries, except for France, the projects and programmes lack a systematic approach to including a combined assessment of the ecological and social impacts. In some countries, for example Czechia and Poland, limited data collection is required but challenges with accountability and data transparency and sharing have been identified.
The fact that the programme does not have a central database of all applications, which should serve as the core for monitoring and reporting, is a significant flaw.
Poland, civil society.
In Germany, the social monitoring system for climate protection (Sozialmonitoring Klimaschutz), have been proposed but not yet implemented.
Access to justice refers to the right of individuals to protect themselves from infringement of their rights, to defend themselves and to hold governments and administrations accountable. Article 47 of the Charter enshrines the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial. Article 19(1) of the TEU (paragraph 2) indicates that Member States shall provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law, including energy.
The Aarhus Convention enshrines three key rights on environmental issues: the right to access to justice, which includes the right to review administrative decisions by a court or another independent body, to ensure that public authorities respect the rights of access to information and the right of public participation, and general environmental law. Access to justice is fundamental to holding public administration authorities accountable for their decisions and actions that do not comply with environmental law.
The EU is a party to the Aarhus Convention. EU laws implementing the Aarhus Convention include Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information, Directive 2003/35/EC on public participation and Regulation 1367/2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention to EU institutions and bodies. Each includes provisions on access to justice.
While the Governance Regulation in its preamble refers to the Aarhus Convention, it does not do so in relation to access to justice. The resulting lack of ‘clear, harmonised, and effective access to justice rights to challenge NECPs and strategies in front of national courts if they fail to meet participatory requirements or contravene environmental legislation’ was criticised by some stakeholders, as outlined in the Commission’s Report to the Parliament and Council on the review of the Regulation (p. 12) and its accompanying document. Gaps in effective access to justice across the EU were identified – due to differences in national legal systems regarding standing or justiciability, the ambiguity of applicable provisions, along with different interpretations of applicable EU law at the national level, among other things (Mähönen, 2024, p. 15).
The Social Climate Fund Regulation similarly does not explicitly include access to justice provisions in the context of SCPs.
However, some of the EU climate and energy laws include provisions related to access to justice and complaint mechanisms, in particular for energy consumers.
The Commission Recommendation 2024/2481 on consumer related provisions of the EED provides further guidance. A similar provision is included in Article 26 of the recast Electricity Market Directive, for example. The EPBD, however, does not include any requirements related to access to justice.
Complaint or review mechanisms exist in all 10 Member States in which FRA conducted fieldwork. However, there were significant variations in terms of the institutions authorised to deal with complaints, the scope of review and the monitoring and decision-making competence of those authorities. Moreover, the formal availability of complaint and review mechanisms does not always translate into accessibility, as practical barriers exist. Additionally, stakeholders highlighted the absence of a systematic approach to the implementation of complaint mechanisms – the perception being that complaints were handled on an ad hoc basis, required legal advice or were subject to complicated and opaque processes.
The most common mechanism is an administrative review of decisions under the competence of the authority managing the implementation of the programmes. In Czechia complaints are managed through the State Environmental Fund offices, while in France an appeal against the ANAH decision or reporting cases of fraud is done through an online form. Information on the complaint mechanism in the Belgium Walloon Region also can be found on the Fonds du Logement Wallon website and the dedicated complaint page. Romania issued project guidelines to complaint procedures, as did Poland.
No programme-specific mechanisms exist in Estonia, Spain or Sweden. In Estonia the review of the programme’s authority decision may be submitted according to the general administrative procedural norms. In Spain, individuals can submit complaints on broader matters of energy and social interventions via different complaint mechanisms and relevant authorities, which vary across autonomous communities (see also Chapter 5.3.1). In Sweden, complaints may be referred by tenants to the Swedish Union of Tenants and regional rent tribunals – administrative bodies competent to try tenancy disputes in their respective regions.
Administrative decisions usually can be further challenged before courts. Such action is usually challenging for individuals, as litigation involves costs such as a filing fee (e.g. 5 % of the claim value in Poland) and legal representation costs. Support during the complaint proceeding can be provided by Ombudsfin (Financial Disputes Ombudsman) or the Insurance Ombudsman in Belgium. The Swedish Union of Tenants offers an advisory service which provides legal advice and may also pursue litigation on behalf of tenants.
Relevant institutions such as ombudsperson offices, equality bodies, national human rights institutions, consumer rights institutions and advocacy organisations can further support the realisation of the right to access to justice including in the context of services. These institutions ensure the implementation of the principle of non-discrimination and support the enforcement of human rights – for example by providing additional complaints mechanisms or counselling, legal representation or information. The Directive on Standards for Equality Bodies in matters of social security and access to goods and services sets out the minimum requirements for these bodies to strengthen the application of the principle of equal treatment in this context (see also Chapter 1).
Some complaints alleging discrimination in access to the programme were brought to the ombudsperson in Czechia and the equality body in Romania. Since 2022, the ombudsperson in Czechia has received a total of 23 complaints related to these programmes, two of which specifically addressed the full digitalisation of the application process – though according to the interviewees, in both cases discrimination claims were found to be unsubstantiated. Nevertheless, the ombudsperson has initiated an own-initiative investigation on the topic of digitalisation and access to the programme: the Czech Administrative Code allows both paper and electronic applications, while the Ministry of the Environment’s allowed only electronic submissions to programmes. The National Council for Combating Discrimination in Romania received and reviewed complaints regarding the application of selection criteria and non-discrimination.
In France, the Defender of Rights may be contacted in case of problems with accessing support through the MaPrimeRénov’ programme. The issue of time for processing the application remains a persistent source of dissatisfaction among the public. Between 2020 and 2022, the Defender of Rights received nearly 500 complaints regarding the difficulties faced by applicants in asserting their rights to the aid. The authority identified numerous shortcomings in the processing of these applications.
In Spain, the national ombudsperson (Defensor del Pueblo) has primarily an advisory and oversight role, protecting citizens’ rights by issuing reports to the Cortes Generales (Spanish Parliament), but also may also act ex officio, such as when they expressed interest in working for the improvement of the conditions in the informal settlements, particularly of Cañada Real near Madrid, or supported the action of the regional ombudsperson of Andalusia.
The right to an effective remedy, including access to justice, is a fundamental right, which should also be guaranteed in the context of the energy transition. However, current governance structures and complaint mechanisms for energy renovation programmes are often fragmented, lack transparency and are difficult to access in practice, especially for vulnerable groups. The absence of systematic monitoring and disaggregated data further undermines the ability to assess and address the fundamental rights impacts of climate and energy policies. Strengthening rights-based accountability, transparent complaint mechanisms and robust monitoring are essential to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected throughout the climate and energy transition.