European Union Approves Ambitious Nature Restoration Law

European countries hope healing forests, wetlands and oceans will help them meet their climate and biodiversity targets, and bolster food security.

Share this article

Climate activists stand outside the European Parliament to demonstrate in support of the Nature Restoration Law. Credit: Philipp von Ditfurth/picture alliance via Getty Images
Climate activists stand outside the European Parliament to demonstrate in support of the Nature Restoration Law. Credit: Philipp von Ditfurth/picture alliance via Getty Images

Share this article

The European Union strengthened its environmental policies this week with adoption of a nature restoration law that member countries hope will help them meet climate and biodiversity targets set under the 2015 Paris Agreement and a global biodiversity agreement reached late last year. 

The new measures go beyond simply preserving existing species and ecosystems. The law tasks the 27 EU member countries with finding ways to restore large tracts of damaged forests, wetlands and fields, as well as rivers, lakes and oceans, with an overall goal over the next few decades of restoring 30 percent of damaged ecosystems in the EU region, which spans 1.6 million square miles from the Arctic Circle to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea.

The European Parliament on Wednesday narrowly voted for the nature restoration law with support from traditional center and center-left parties, including Social Democrats and Greens, as well as a few votes from center-right and liberal market-based parties. 

Newsletters

We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s top headlines deliver the full story, for free.

Opposition to the law coalesced around the large center-right European People’s Party bloc, which allied itself with far-right and nationalist parties to try and derail the law with a fact-free propaganda campaign that included demonstrably false statements, including claims that the law would force villages to be abandoned and threaten food security.

The debate in the European Parliament the day before the vote prompted some observers to characterize the law’s approval as a sign that science and common sense can prevail against misinformation and populism. 

“The science is crystal clear, showing that far too much of Europe’s nature has been degraded or destroyed,” said César Luena, a Spanish member of the European Parliament responsible for shepherding the law through the legislative process. “It’s vital to reverse that trend, and time is running out.”

Austrian ecosystem researcher Andreas Böhner and several graduate student assistants monitor soil chemistry and plant growth in an alpine pasture within a protected area, where agriculture co-exists with nature conservation. Credit: Bob Berwyn/Inside Climate News
Austrian ecosystem researcher Andreas Böhner and several graduate student assistants monitor soil chemistry and plant growth in an alpine pasture within a protected area, where agriculture co-exists with nature conservation. Credit: Bob Berwyn/Inside Climate News

He said that climate solutions without nature solutions are half measures.

“Let me give you a couple examples, like making soils healthy,” he said. “It’s not good just for farmers, it’s essential for ensuring the soils can store carbon. And carbon-rich soils, in turn, store water and mitigate the consequences of flash storms. Nature is our best ally in fighting climate change, and if we don’t take proper measures to let it thrive, we will be ditching our best chance to achieve climate neutrality.”

Restoring degraded European natural areas would be a big step toward a world where “nature and the economy don’t conflict,” said Jutta Paulus, a member of the Greens/EFA in the European Parliament who led the EU negotiations on the law. “It will help us make nature and the economy work together to serve people without destroying the planet,” she said. 

The nature restoration law was introduced by the EU Commission in June 2022 and, as originally proposed, would have required member states to establish recovery plans for 20 percent of the EUs’ land and sea areas by 2030, and for all areas in need of restoration by 2050. It also includes restoration targets for key habitats and species, including reversing the decline of pollinating insects by 2030, given how important they are to food security.

Nature Law Debate Reflects European Culture Wars

European environmental experts said the law is the logical next step in a series of environmental mandates under the EU’s 2019 Green Deal, which aims to plant 3 billion trees, reduce greenhouse gas emissions 55 percent from 1990 levels by 2030 and make Europe climate-neutral by 2050.

The research and peer-reviewed studies that shaped the new nature restoration law make it clear those targets can’t be reached without repairing damaged ecosystems, and without changing the trajectory of the European economy to a direction where it gives back to nature more than it takes,” said EU Commission environmental spokesperson Adalbert Jahnz

The coalition of conservative European lawmakers opposing the law tried to play on consumer fears of higher food prices, and presented agricultural interests as victims of EU regulations and bureaucracy, even though many farmers actually support the law and benefit from EU subsidies for sustainable food production.

A group of Austrian farmers and forest owners tour an Alpine wilderness forest that could someday be expanded under the EU's new nature restoration law. They were there to learn about the ecological benefits of expanding areas where natural processes prevail. Credit: Bob Berwyn/Inside Climate News
A group of Austrian farmers and forest owners tour an Alpine wilderness forest that could someday be expanded under the EU’s new nature restoration law. They were there to learn about the ecological benefits of expanding areas where natural processes prevail. Credit: Bob Berwyn/Inside Climate News

“The proposal from the commission is going in the wrong direction,” said Christine Schneider, a member of the European Parliament representing the center-right Christian Democratic Union. “Protecting biodiversity can only go hand in hand with the population, not by forcing rules on the foresters, farmers and making them responsible for the disappearance of biodiversity, nor by removing arable farmland from production and endangering food production.” 

That drew an angry response from Iratxe Garcia Perez, a Spanish Member of Parliament representing the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party and chair of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats.

“You’re grubbing for votes in a fake defense of farmers and rural environments,” she said. “You’ve used a strategy of lies, denying scientific facts and rubbing shoulders with deniers. And although 3,500 scientists and large companies support this, the EPP has decided to declare war on nature restoration.”

Garcia Perez noted how the conservative wing’s denial of climate science dovetails with increasingly misogynistic attacks by far-right parties on women and the LGBTQ community.The EPP is “robbing future generations of their future,” she added.

This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

Donate Now

In another exchange, a conservative member of parliament called the nature restoration law a “crazy environmental plan which is destroying agriculture and creating even more pollution,” to which a supporter of the law responded, “I’m a farmer. You know what threatens food sovereignty? What threatens farming and farm revenue is using more pesticides and using more artificial fertilizers.”

Terry Reinke, co-president of the European Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament, summed up: “Our rivers are dying, our forests are sick. Our nature is in deep crisis. We have to restore our nature now, not in a distant future when the EPP has gotten their act together.”

The center-right’s alignment on this issue with extreme nationalist parties is “a dangerous development, especially as far right parties and groups and movements are gaining ground across Europe,” she said.

Ultimately, the new law is not just about restoring nature, Luena added.

“It’s about ensuring a habitable environment where the well being of current and future generations is ensured,” he said. “Where the land and seas continue having the capacity to provide us the goods and services that our lives and our economy fully depend on. It is about our lives. It’s about us and those who come after us.”

About This Story

Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.

That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.

Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.

Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?

Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.

Thank you,

Share this article