While key EU policies aim to preserve biodiversity and combat climate change in Europe’s forests are in line with the EU’s international commitments, their impact is limited, says the EU Court of Auditors in a report published on 4 October.
This report takes stock of the EU 2014-2020 forestry strategy and of key EU forestry policies. In view of the deteriorating status of Europe’s forests, it argues that the European Commission should have done much more within its remit to combat illegal logging and ensure that forestry measures under rural development are more focused on biodiversity and climate change—bearing in mind that forests are a shared competence.
“EU forests are multifunctional, serving environmental, economic and social purposes. This is a very important issue for biodiversity and climate change mitigation, but forests should also be adapted to climate change”, the head of the audit, Samo Jereb, told the press. According to him, the impact was limited because the strategy “did not have legally binding targets”.
The auditors looked at EU legislation affecting forests, analysed data on expenditure co-financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and examined selected forestry measures under rural development in Germany, Spain, and Poland.
They found that the funds allocated in the EU budget for forest areas are significantly lower than those allocated to agriculture, while the area covered by forests and the area used for agriculture are almost identical.
EU funding for forestry represents less than 1% of the CAP budget (and 3% of EAFRD spending), and Member States’ measures are mainly aimed at maintaining biodiversity, not restoring it. “Member States have reforestation projects, but do not take into account the aspects of biodiversity. They allow areas of monoculture. This does not help biodiversity. There should be a mix of species”, said Mr Jereb.
According to the auditors, the mere existence of a forest management plan—one of the conditions for receiving EAFRD funding—is not a guarantee that this funding will be targeted at environmentally sustainable activities. Furthermore, the EU’s common monitoring system does not allow for the assessment of the effects of forestry measures on biodiversity or climate change.
In addition, only 0.4% of EU operators check whether the timber is of legal origin and the Commission does not have adequate data. Member States have different rules and understandings of what constitutes illegally logged timber. According to Mr Jereb “the Commission does not even check whether the definitions are the same”.
In addition, some measures are underway. “Member States had to transpose the revised Renewable Energy Directive by the end of June 2021. The Commission’s guidelines were expected before January 2021, but are still not there. Member States are left along”, Mr Jereb stressed. The same applies to biomass for energy purposes.
Recommendations. The Court of Auditors makes three recommendations to the Commission to be implemented by 2023:
1) establish and implement an action plan to assess the uptake and implementation of forest conservation measures in the EU and disseminate knowledge to Member States on how to adapt forests to climate change;
2) strengthen the fight against illegal logging, by examining the possibility of legislative proposals to strengthen the scrutiny of Member States’ controls; and
3) ensure that EU-funded forestry actions are in line with the principles of sustainable forest management and that the Commission has the relevant information to ‘assess the contribution of EU-funded forestry measures to biodiversity, climate change mitigation and adaptation’.
The head of audit was pleased that the European Commission had accepted them all. According to him, most of them are already included in the EU’s new forestry strategy for 2030, presented in July (see EUROPE 12764/1). However, what will matter is implementation.
“We will assess the effectiveness of the measures only when they are implemented. We will check whether the action is taking place on the ground. Several strategies have already been adopted, but none of them were binding. This strategy is a very positive first step, but it is not the end of the story”, said the auditor.
This is all the more so as several Member States already feel that the Commission is going too far (see EUROPE 12795/15). The exchange of views on this subject between the EU27 environment ministers on 6 October will provide a clearer picture. See the report: https://bit.ly/3l9X7NU (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)