The EU Parliament will vote on Wednesday on a law to increase biodiversity.
The law can severely restrict Swedish agriculture and forestry.
At the same time mean researcher that it is necessary to restore natural areas to cope with climate change.
If the law is voted through, 30 percent of nature and water damaged by climate change and production must be restored. This should be ready by the year 2030 in a first step and is also in line with the global goals for biodiversity. The Nature Restoration Act is about creating living ecosystems, increasing pollinators such as bees and butterflies and strengthening nature’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide.
Severely limited agriculture
In Sweden, the law would severely restrict agriculture and forestry. 3.5 million hectares, 16 percent of forestry, would have to be taken out of use according to the Swedish University of Agriculture, SLU. Even large parts of arable land would cease to be farmed, which the National Association of Farmers is critical of.
– It lacks balance against other societal interests such as preparedness and food supply, says Palle Borgström, chairman of LRF.
Help against climate change
According to The European council 80 percent of the EU’s nature and ecosystems are in poor condition. They believe that it is necessary to restore nature in order to secure food production and nature’s resilience.
The Nature Conservation Society in Sweden is positive about the law and sees it as necessary to create robust ecosystems that can withstand climate change better.
– We live in a completely new world now, where risk minimization will be much more important than production maximization, and the whole society needs to take responsibility for that, says Louise Karlberg, head of the department for forests and agriculture at the Nature Conservation Association.
From the beginning, the bill from the EU Commission was to restore 20 percent of land and sea areas by 2030. Last June, the EU Parliament voted on the issue. At the time, the council was divided, 44 in favor and 44 against, and if it is voted through on Wednesday, it could still mean a series of changes.