• Tar_Alcaran
    link
    English
    2712 days ago

    Unfortunately it only tells countries to make a good effort. But that’s better than nothing, and the current policy of doing nothing is at least out of the window.

    As someone whose country just put the moronic Farmers party in charge of the environment, this EU law makes me very happy

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1212 days ago

      As someone whose country reelected a party that outright ignores EU regulation, I wish you a better luck…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Do you have some kind of pointer to a summary of what concrete impacts it actually has? Like, the article here doesn’t list any concrete material. I see some phrases like “20% of land and sea”. Given that Hungary and Austria were apparently both reluctant and both are land-locked, I am wondering if it was “20% of land and sea”, where sea can substitute for land.

      Does it basically ask EU members to designate at least 20% of their territory as a sort of national park?

      The EC has a section on their website on the thing, but it’s…really fluffy and full of marketing material. Their factsheet on the law is…very sparse on actual facts about the law.

      EDIT: This Wikipedia page seems to reference what is a superset of it:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Green_Deal

      But the targets there don’t seem to match up with what is going through, like:

      The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 includes the following targets:

      • Protect 30% of the sea territory and 30% of land territory especially primary forests and old-growth forests.

      …whereas the law that went through uses “20%”.

      EDIT: Okay, that’s definitely a superset of what was planned for the law, because the page does reference the targets that were actually taken being 20%.

      • Tar_Alcaran
        link
        English
        811 days ago

        The factsheet is vague because it tells countries to find a way to fix a problem. All countries have to come up with a realistic method to improve natural areas, 20% by 2026, 30% need a concrete plan by 2030 and 90% by 2050.

        More importantly, there’s a requirement that Member States make a significant effort to prevent worsening in the meantime.

        What those plans are, is up to the Member States, but they need to be solid and realistic, not the usual vagueness