The EU Parliament’s Committee on the Environment (ENVI) failed to vote on the European Commission’s proposed Nature Restoration Law last Thursday. However, it is clear that the committee chose not to reject the proposals by the narrowest of margins. The issue will now be reviewed ahead of completing the final stages of the voting process on June 27, including a final vote to take the proposal forward to a vote in plenary.
The proposals have been heavily criticized by a large number of MEPs – and with good reason. While the Swedish Forest Industries Federation supports efforts to strengthen biodiversity and restore ecosystems, it believes that the legislation in its current form is severely flawed and penalises Member States with greater environmental ambitions.
“We strongly support the law’s stated aim of restoring damaged ecosystems. However, we don’t believe that the Commission’s proposals will do this effectively. The proposals have extremely far-reaching consequences, which is reflected in the deadlock in the ENVI. We hope that scope remains to implement the necessary changes to the text before it is finally adopted in plenary,” says Viveka Beckeman, Director General of Swedish Forest Industries.
Central planning, with binding targets based on nature types applied unilaterally, is not an effective way to restore natural environments. Greater consideration should be given to the enormous impact the proposals will have on several Member States. While focusing on the importance of functioning ecosystems, the legislation fails to consider the impact of restricting access to ecosystem services.
“From the perspective of forestry management, it is particularly important that we are able to work with nature conservation in already designated areas. It is possible to combine elevated environmental ambitions with active forest management, and it is possible to increase natural values in designated areas with active measures, for example through rewetting and controlled burning,” says Beckeman.
Paradoxically, it is the most ambitious Member States – with a strong track record of protecting and restoring nature – that are set to face some of the most severe consequences, while consequences are less drastic for some of the less ambitious countries.
The consequences of the legislation will be determined to a large extent by how Member States implement the Habitats Directive. Sweden’s reporting on the state of its current distribution of various nature types uses 20 per cent of pre-industrial distribution as a reference, in contrast to many Member States that apply distribution at their time of entry into the EU. If habitats are to be restored according to the current Swedish reference values, this would mean that around 1.5 million hectares of forest would need to be taken out of use.
Swedish Forest Industries calls for greater flexibility for Member States in the draft legislation at ENVI’s meeting on June 27and in the upcoming votes in the Council and in the full EU Parliament, as well as in the upcoming trialogue between the Commission, the Council and the Parliament. Greater understanding of, and adaptation to, the individual conditions and regulatory structures of Member States is needed.
