Introduced by the European Commission on 22 June 2022, and adopted in Plenary by the European Parliament on 12 July 2023, the EU Nature Restoration Law (NRL) represents the first-ever piece of legislation with the purpose of restoring the EU’s degraded ecosystems, habitats and species on a continental scale. This new legislation foresees a change of approach by setting legally binding targets for ecosystem restoration. The bindingness intends notably to overcome the shortcomings encountered by the previous EU environmental laws, which lacked the expected impacts due to the voluntary nature of their targets and commitments. To this end, in addition to these legally binding restoration targets, a detailed implementation framework is foreseen for Member States: according to the NRL, Member States are indeed requested to prepare National Restoration Plans (NRP) within 2 years from the adoption of the Law.
Although mentioning that restoration measures should be planned by “taking into account their contribution to the sustainable development of the relevant regions and communities”[1], the initial legislative proposal did not clarify what the expected role for the regions within this new framework would be, not in the elaboration nor decision-making processes of the plans, which rely on Member States. In light of this, the Islands and Intermediterranean Commissions of the CPMR found it essential to consider regions’ perspectives and launched a constructive reflection on this piece of legislation, starting with an international seminar held in Palma on 23 February 2023. In particular, the event intended to gather the views of islands and Mediterranean member regions and stimulate discussions on the potential impacts that the upcoming Law could have on these territories and realities. In fact, peripheral and maritime regions, especially islands, which are home to a rich natural and cultural heritage, and which will therefore be most concerned by the NRL, should be given special attention in such a debate.
Building on the key observations and outcomes of the seminar, as well as the actions and experience of their members, the two Geographical Commissions of the CPMR worked in the past months on a related Policy Position, aiming to convey some crucial messages in this regard to the EU co-legislators.
A main critical point highlighted by this work is the need to increase multilevel stakeholders’ engagement at the earliest designing stage of the plans and the role that sub-national governments already play in supporting and developing ecosystem restoration programmes. Indeed, it should be taken into account that regions are already heavily involved in identifying vulnerable areas, supporting restoration, protection and monitoring activities, as well as ensuring policy coherence and creating synergies between regional and local plans and strategies.
It should also be noted that these practices are tailored to address the specific needs and conditions of local ecosystems and communities. In this sense, it is well known that the Mediterranean Sea, benefitting from a unique biodiversity and ecosystems, is one of the hotspots most impacted by the cumulative impacts of coastal and maritime activities as well as climate change worldwide. Likewise, insular territories and outermost regions are confronted with a range of climate and biodiversity risks specific to them and must be the subject of special considerations when implementing actions for climate adaptation or nature restoration. The challenges linked to insularity make it often also more difficult to achieve the EU’s climate and biodiversity objectives, especially when the given implementation deadlines are too short or even relatively unrealistic. Therefore, a key observation raised in the joint Policy Position is that, it would be important for the schedules set out by the Regulation to be reconsidered, while giving more attention to the specific characteristics of islands and outermost regions by explicitly mentioning the element of insularity in its text.
Reflecting on the particular challenges that regions might face in the uptake of the NRL, one cannot help but wonder about the potential socio-economic impacts that the Regulation would imply for the most affected sectors, such as fisheries, agriculture, tourism, and transport. In this regard, IC and IMC regions stressed the importance of a proper assessment of measures that are necessary to enable a fair and equitable transition in key sectors, such as those related to food production, with considerable implications for food security. Moreover, if on the one hand this piece of legislation represents an outstanding opportunity for the development of eco-tourism, it might, on the other hand, pose some questions of socio-economic sustainability for local communities heavily relying on tourism, as it is often the case for EU islands and Mediterranean coastal areas.
Finally, another issue raised by IC and IMC member Regions is related to specific compensatory instruments that could be designed to cover potential economic losses suffered by the concerned stakeholders, as well as the administrative support to be offered to regions to ensure an effective implementation of the NRL. This would be particularly relevant, considering that some regional authorities – especially the smaller ones – sometimes face a lack of capacity and technical expertise.
Overall, the NRL should not remain locked into a short-term vision and welcome this call of regions, which are key actors notably in achieving the EU’s 2030 climate targets and climate neutrality by 2050. Since islands will have to lift the weight of great challenges related to their unique geographical reality, a fit-for-all policy would not be adequate. Having that in mind, seeking solutions at the subnational level becomes essential, as it is incurred by the specific implementation of the Natura 2000 network, multiple Directives (WFD, MSFD, MSP). The subsidiarity principle and particularly Article 174 of the TFEU should be the basis for all actions and plans to be implemented in this field.
In the current context, the NRL represents a major step towards addressing the significant environmental and territorial challenges the EU is already facing. Nonetheless, as stated in the joint IC and IMC Policy Position, for this Regulation to be effectively implemented and its benefits enhanced, it should ensure the necessary multi-level and multi-stakeholders’ approach and co-ownership, fully recognizing the interdependence of sectors and socio-economic and environmental ecosystems while seeking coordination and collaboration to achieve meaningful and sustainable results for the future.
Following challenging trialogue negotiations, the IC & IMC remain attentive while the future Nature Restoration Law, before entering into force, will go through its final steps, including the endorsement by the Members States and decisive votes by the EU Parliament ENVI Committee and Plenary session by the end of the year.
For further information, please contact:
- Claudia Guzzon claudia.guzzon@crpm.org – CPMR Islands Commission Executive Secretary
- Lise Guennal lise.guennal@crpm.org – CPMR Islands Commission Senior Project and Policy Officer
- Elodie Nunes elodie.nunes@crpm.org – CPMR Intermediterranean Commission Executive Secretary
[1] European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment, Nature restoration law – For people, climate, and planet, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022, introductory par. 58, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/86148