In March 2024, voting on the EU’s landmark Nature Restoration Law (NRL) was postponed after eight Member States withdrew support. The proposed law would oblige Member States to restore 20% of land and sea habitat from poor to good condition by 2030, with this target increasing each decade, likely resulting in heightened governmental scrutiny of corporate impacts and initiatives on nature-related issues. Warning that not ratifying the law would entail damage to not only nature but also the EU’s reputation, 11 environment ministers wrote to Member States on May 13th to urge those planning to either abstain or vote against the law to re-think supporting NRL.
Although the climate mitigation and adaptation benefits of nature restoration are clear, the scale of implementation will be a challenge for countries and require significant investment from governments and organizations alike. The next opportunity for Member States to vote on the law – when, sources suggest, environment ministers need just one participant to switch sides – is June 17th. It is, perhaps, unlikely that Member States will change their opinions by next month, as action once again lags behind ambition.
While the results of the June vote will impact national commitments to restoring nature, corporate organizations are still being held accountable for their impacts on nature. In addition to reporting under the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), some European nations are taking it a step further and mandating nature positive outcomes. For example, the UK's Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) regulation kicked in early this year, forcing developers to evidence at least 10% biodiversity net gain on all new developments. Other nations are likely to follow suit.
