Restoring degraded ecosystems in the EU - 80% of them are in poor condition - is urgent for the environment, climate, life on earth and economic growth, and the binding nature restoration targets proposed by the European Commission in June enabled the EU to take the lead at the COP15 in Montreal (see EUROPE 13087/3), the EU27 environment ministers said on Tuesday 20 December.
Their first public exchange of views on the proposed EU regulation on the subject, which sets binding targets to restore at least 20% of terrestrial and marine ecosystems by 2030 and all those in need of restoration by 2050 (see EUROPE 12977/17), showed the unanimous will of the ministers to reconcile ambition, practicability and flexibility for the EU Member States - with sufficient EU funding, as the challenge is considerable.
For this last ‘Environment’ Council of the year under the Czech Presidency, they were invited to decide on the level of ambition and the timetable for measures, and also on the relevance of the principle of non-degradation to ensure the long-term benefits of healthy ecosystems capable of delivering valuable ecosystem services (see EUROPE 13086/4).
These are the two issues identified by the outgoing Czech Presidency as requiring further work, following a first compromise submitted on 24 November to the Council’s Working Party on the Environment on articles 1-10 of the proposed regulation (definitions, geographical coverage and restoration of various terrestrial, marine, urban, pollinator, agricultural and forest ecosystems). The Swedish Presidency will take on this matter.
“The text is ambitious, no doubt, and its implementation will require intense efforts and a lot of money. The poor state of Europe’s ecosystems is hampering our economic growth. We need realistic targets that are up to the challenges. We also need to ensure the sustainability of measures to restore our ecosystems, otherwise the investments made and the ecosystems restored will be lost”, stressed the Czech Minister, Marian Jurečka, to set the scene. They all thanked him for the “considerable work accomplished” by the Czech Presidency in the area of environment and climate.
Support for ambitious goals, doubts about the timetable. All delegations stressed that the level of ambition was adequate to address the biodiversity crisis and contribute to solving the climate crisis and insisted on mobilising all key stakeholders - farmers, fishers, foresters.
Several delegations, including Latvia and Ireland, considered that 2 years to draw up national restoration plans is far too short a period of time. Ireland considered the 2030 target to be very ambitious for some habitats and species.
Countries with a federal structure, such as Austria, have requested adjustments.
Others such as Luxembourg, considering the 2050 target unrealistic, proposed to set an intermediate target for 2040.
National specificities and flexibility. The ministers stressed the importance of taking into account the specific national and local conditions and starting points of the different Member States.
They also insisted that Member States should be given a large degree of flexibility. Greece was even of the view that a European directive would be more appropriate than an EU regulation.
More funding. Many ministers stressed the size of the investments required and the importance of access to sufficient European funds to finance the needs. Some indicated that they would have funding difficulties.
Croatia and Italy asked for a fund dedicated to nature restoration to be included in the text of the regulation, with entry into force for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the Croatian minister said, “otherwise, implementation will be very complicated”. Without additional funding, Latvia will not be able to accept a binding target for peatlands, the country warned.
Several delegations highlighted the lack of expertise and scientific knowledge on marine ecosystems, which will require a lot of work to fill this gap and establish indicators.
Need for consistency. Poland argued for consistency between this regulation and other legislation. What will happen to the forests that have replaced the land abandoned by farmers? - asked the Polish minister. Greece, which has seen an increase of more than 4% in its forest area in 40 years, has the same question.
Portugal, citing consistency with the energy transition, asked for explicit recognition of the contribution of some green projects, such as solar panels, to the preservation of biodiversity; some species such as the Iberian lynx feed in the shade, it argued.
Non-deterioration principle. The majority of delegations agreed that extending this principle beyond the ecosystems covered by the Natura 2000 network was a good solution to ensure long-term benefits from restoration.
Countries such as Malta, on the other hand, have expressed concern about the applicability of this principle, which is impossible for some habitats. Croatia welcomed the fact that in its compromise the Czech Presidency proposed an approach based on the efforts already made by the Member States rather than on results. Slovenia pointed out that improving one habitat can make another worse. It wants the principle to apply only to habitats in poor condition.
The Commission’s Executive Vice-President responsible for the ‘Green Deal’, Frans Timmermans, said that “flexibility should not move us away from the targets”. He pointed out that in the current EU budget, €100 billion is earmarked for biodiversity until 2027, which is equal to €14 billion per year, “which should cover the estimated restoration costs of €6-8 billion”. According to him, Member States can, “if necessary, adapt their CAP strategic plans”. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)