Earlier this year, a previous version of the law was watered down after protests from farmers across the continent, resulting in curbs on pesticide use and nutrient pollution being removed. Disputes are certain to continue at a national and local level, but conservationists in Europe are still celebrating.
“This is a historic milestone for nature, climate and science-based decision making. Despite the massive campaign of lies and scaremongering, the nature restoration law has been adopted, paving the way for the birth of essentially a new economic sector. We now need to roll our sleeves and get on with it,” says Ariel Brunner, regional director at BirdLife Europe, an expert on EU environmental policy.
“The restoration law will provide vital uplift to efforts to bring back species, build back carbon sinks, provide nature-based solutions to the ravages of climate change. But it also sends a powerful message to the world ahead of the CBD [convention on biological diversity] COP in Colombia. Europe is not preaching nature to the poor while destroying it at home,” he says.
The message about what was at stake with the vote could not have been clearer from the UN’s environment chief Inger Andersen.
“Backtracking from these commitments – commitments which are similar in stature to the 2015 Paris accord – would have deeply damaged the EU’s credibility on the global stage. While some voices may try to create confusion and spread misinformation, the reality is that investing in nature brings benefits for us all,” she said in a statement after the vote.
Internationally, the vote provides must-needed momentum ahead of the biodiversity Cop16 in Cali, Colombia later this year. It will be the first time governments meet after they agreed this decade’s biodiversity targets in December 2022.
The EU played a leading role in pushing for an ambitious agreement at the summit in Montreal, resulting in targets to protect 30% of land and sea, reform subsidies and restore ecosystems. It was the leading voice from the global north in the absence of the US, which is not a party to the UN treaty on biodiversity. The bitter controversy that followed was not expected.
While the EU has not been able to pass all of the targets into law after opposition from some member states, it shows the international agreement remains alive. Governments have never met a single target on biodiversity in previous decades and if the EU’s nature restoration law had not passed, it would have put the targets in jeopardy after less than two years.
“The passing of the nature restoration law means the EU, one of the biggest proponents of ambition for nature protection, has finally got something to back its rhetoric up,” says Li Shuo, director of the China climate hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, who has followed UN biodiversity negotiations for years.
“Even for a progressive and well-off part of the world, the tortuous journey to pass the EU law underlines the tremendous challenges countries face at home. Nature protection still needs to confront significant industrial opposition. To truly drive home the need to preserve nature, the world still has much to do,” he says.
In Colombia, governments will need to present their national plans on how they will help the world meet the international targets. Many so far have not done so. Their ambition, especially those from the developing world, will probably depend on whether the global north can make good on its finance commitment for biodiversity.
Former Ecuadorian environment minister Daniel Ortega Pacheco welcomed the vote but said that some of the EU’s policies on the environment were confusing, voicing concern about the consequences of environmental rules the bloc is introducing with trading partners.
“In Latin America, preservation practices are still being debated and restoration is just initially emerging as good practice to be explored. This decision [on the nature restoration law] stimulates these debates. However, equity and development should be considered when these practices are explored in the developing world, particularly as other environmental requirements are being promoted as part of countries’ obligations under trade agreements between Latin American countries with the EU,” he said.
Read more:
