In the league table chart for overall performance in 2003, Malta placed ninth out of 32 member countries.

In the preface to the report just published, Prof Jacqueline McGlade, executive director of EEA stated that, “A special mention must be made for Malta entering the chart for the first time with a remarkable score of 78 per cent”.

The reporting obligations for Malta are coordinated by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority as the leading national competent authority on environmental matters, with inputs from other agencies including Malta Resources Authority, Water Services Corporation, University of Malta, WasteServ, Agricultural Services and Rural Development. MEPA’s ICT department together with staff from the Environment Protection Directorate packaged the environmental information in line with the EEA’s reporting obligations.

Of the old EU member states, Austria was ranked first with 95 per cent, Sweden second with 90 per cent, Denmark fifth with 85 per cent, Germany sixth with 81 per cent, and Finland eighth with 79 per cent.

The new EU member states that preceded Malta are Latvia, which came third with 89 per cent, Slovenia fourth with 88 per cent and Estonia seventh with 80 per cent. Malta is followed by, among others, Bulgaria and Norway with 75 per cent, Lithuania, France and UK at 73 per cent. The average score was 64 per cent with the two lowest scores for Luxembourg at 25 per cent and Albania at 17 per cent.

The assessment on reporting environmental data sets is published to show progress against agreed, stable, well-defined objectives in order to allow EEA member countries to focus their resources on putting regular reporting procedures in place.

Progress has been assessed in 12 priority areas. Malta reported data on eight of these because, in two of the data sets – greenhouse gas and national emission ceilings – Malta was not obliged to report. Two other areas, river and lake quality, are not applicable to Malta.

The data sets reported for Malta include data on greenhouse gas inventory, ozone exceedances, air quality, groundwater quality, land cover, soil contamination, national inventories and emission projections, marine data, and nationally designated areas.

Data quality is assessed on timeliness, completeness across the geographical entity and accuracy. The average score across all countries has been improving from year to year: 45 per cent in 2000, 53 per cent in 2001, 62 per cent in 2002 and 64 per cent in 2003.