Assessment of the Consultation on the Birds Directive and the Habitats Directive—Input from Industry
The European nature conservation directives are central to the protection of species and habitats. In practice, however, they are increasingly leading to complex and protracted permitting procedures. In light of the European Commission’s stress test, the BDI published a position paper that calls for nature conservation to remain effective while also becoming more proportionate, practical, and legally certain.
Extensive Regulatory Review Slows Investment
Companies face significant challenges when planning and obtaining approval for new projects due to the application of the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive. Extensive environmental impact assessments, mapping projects spanning several years, stringent requirements for scientific evidence, and additional expert reports result in a considerable burden. Based on industry experience, approval processes can be extended by two to four years due to nature conservation issues. In some cases, this is compounded by lead times of two to three years for nature conservation studies.
From the BDI’s perspective, a core problem lies in the scope of the FFH impact assessment. Even minor uncertainties can trigger extensive assessments. In practice, worst-case scenarios dominate, while project developers must demonstrate a project’s harmlessness through significant scientific effort.
The BDI therefore calls for limiting the requirements to a proportionate level. Projects should not be blocked on the basis of purely theoretical risks and residual scientific uncertainties. Instead, clear and legally binding standards are needed that provide both authorities and companies with reliable assessment criteria and reduce the scope of additional expert reports.
Population Protection Rather Than Individual Protection
The BDI also sees a need for reform in species conservation. The current approach, which is heavily focused on individual organisms, can lead to extensive mapping and conservation measures becoming necessary even though the conservation status of a population is not at risk. This also applies to widespread species.
Effective and practical nature conservation should therefore be more strongly focused on the conservation status of populations. The long-term survival of a species must be the key factor in the success of species conservation.
Greater Flexibility in Offset Measures and “Temporary Nature”
Suitable areas for coherence and compensation measures are becoming increasingly scarce. The BDI therefore advocates for more flexible instruments. These include eco-accounts, the option of earmarked financial compensation, and greater spatial flexibility in compensation and replacement measures.
There is also a need for action regarding “temporary nature.” Companies currently bear the potential consequences under nature conservation law if protected natural habitats develop on temporarily unused land. This can create perverse incentives to prevent such temporary habitats from forming in the first place. The BDI calls for reliable regulations that allow companies to permit “temporary nature” without jeopardizing the future use of the land.
Thinking About Nature Conservation and Industry Together
The stress test offers an opportunity to further develop the application of European nature conservation directives. High nature conservation standards and faster permitting procedures are not mutually exclusive. What is crucial are proportionate assessments, reliable standards, more flexible compensation options, and greater planning certainty.
From the BDI’s perspective, the goal must therefore be to reduce bureaucratic burdens and increase legal certainty, without losing sight of the nature conservation objectives of the European directives. For further information pleas find the position paper below.