European Union (EU) states on Monday definitively adopted key Green Deal legislation that requires the restoration of damaged ecosystems, with the Austrian Environment Minister defying her own government to support the text after months of deadlock .
The decision, supported by 20 states out of 27 during a meeting of environment ministers in Luxembourg, paves the way for the entry into force of this text intended to halt the loss of biodiversity – and whose impact for agriculture has been debated. It had already been validated by MEPs.
Twist: Austria, which had officially chosen to abstain due to divisions in the ruling coalition, finally voted in favor. Conservative Chancellor Karl Nehammer deemed the vote of his Green Minister Leonore Gewessler “illegal”, and announced “to file an action for annulment” before the European courts.
The Belgian Alain Maron, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the EU, considered that it was an “internal quarrel” in Austria, the only one counting the vote of the ministers. “No environmental break […]it is our duty to respond to the emergency of the collapse of biodiversity,” commented this environmentalist leader.
The legislation, the adoption of which is described as a “historic victory” by the environmental NGO WWF, requires the establishment by 2030 of ecosystem recovery measures on 20% of land and marine spaces on a global scale. EU, and restore 30% of habitats (wetlands, forests, etc.) in poor condition.
Other provisions aim to improve the criteria measuring the health of forests, to remove dams on waterways, and to stop the decline of bees.
After tough negotiations, particularly concerning the agricultural sector, the negotiators of the European Parliament and the States agreed in mid-November 2023 on a very watered down version of this “restoration of nature” legislation, an agreement ratified at the end of February by the MEPs.
But the final formal green light from the Twenty-Seven, essential, was long overdue, due to lack of the required majority (at least 15 countries representing 65% of the EU population): three States (Sweden, Netherlands, Italy) intended to vote against, and five (Belgium, Austria, Poland, Finland, Hungary) abstained.
They were particularly alarmed by new charges for farmers, obstacles to the powerful forestry of Scandinavian countries or increased interference from the EU.
“Turning point”
On Monday, only the Austrian minister changed her position, which was enough to change the outcome of the vote.
“My conscience tells me unequivocally that when the happiness of future generations is at stake, courageous decisions are necessary,” insisted Ms. Gewessler, welcoming “good compromises and balanced measures”.
“The time for political and ideological quibbles is behind us,” responded European Commissioner for the Environment Virginijus Sinkevicius, recalling that the text reflects the objectives adopted at the COP15 Biodiversity in Montreal in 2022.
For Spanish Minister Teresa Ribera, the States were required to ratify the compromise that they themselves had concluded with the European Parliament: “It is a question of coherence. It would be difficult, even dangerous in terms of the credibility of institutions, to reverse course,” she warned.
His French counterpart Christophe Béchu welcomed a vote to “preserve for future generations the services provided by ecosystems to guarantee our means of production and our resilience”.
The end of the institutional marathon was hailed as “a turning point for nature and society” by a coalition of environmental NGOs (BirdLife, ClientEarth, WWF, European Environmental Bureau), calling on States to apply the text “correctly and without delay “.
The legislation “will help strengthen the resilience of the seas, the largest carbon reservoir, by fighting against destructive fishing”, going against the “anti-environmental discourse” which marked the European campaign, adds Nicolas Fournier, from Oceana.
Conversely, the European Confederation of Forest Owners condemned, through its vice-president, “legislation synonymous with over-regulation and bureaucracy […] putting nature under cover.
“We cannot be told from above how to manage our farm: if we think we are helping nature on command, it doesn’t work,” reacted the main German agricultural union.
The impact of the text in rural areas sparked a violent political battle last year, with right-wing MEPs seeing it as a threat to food security. This fueled agricultural anger at the start of 2024 despite the vast flexibilities introduced.