EU Commission is planning to decide on legally binding nature restoration targets. Those targets include restoration of at least 70% of drained peatlands and protecting 30% of land and 30% of sea in the EU.
Those demands would have a major negative effect in Finland, where forest industry is extremely important by producing 18.1 % of exported goods and bringing a tax revenue of 2,7 billion euros. Such an economic benefit has been possible due to the extremely efficient management of - mostly privately owned - forests in the country.
It should be noted that Finnish forests were not converted to other use - like in most of Europe - despite demands during the 19th century. In contrast, Finnish forests fortunately got economic value due to the developing industry which saved them from being destroyed.
To ensure the raw material for saws and the pulp and paper mills, many actions were made during the 20th century to ensure forest growth. Tree production sustainability was reached in 1970´s, and thereafter forests have grown every year more than they have been used - although also the production of forest industry has increased.
Furthermore, during recent decades many voluntary actions have been made by forest owners to save the biodiversity, which already has turned the previously highly negative development more positive. And therefore, Finnish forests are today remarkable carbon sinks, important source of raw materials and on their way of reaching ecological sustainability.
Finland rarely looks for its own benefit in the Union. Accordingly, the Finnish Government´s decision of nature restoration followed those tracks until the last week. And that was a huge difference to Sweden - exerting almost as sustainable forestry - which noted that the Union has no justification in forest issues.
However, the Commission plans were noted by the Finnish forest industry, forest owners and professionals as well as ordinary countryside people, who put a pressure on politicians. And finally, they were heard in the national Parliament, where the big opposition parties - Conservatives and True Finns - challenged Government´s earlier decision to support the EU decree on restoration.
And as a result, also Parliament members of Social democrats, Center party and Swedish people´s party joined the opposition. Only ultimate left of the government - Left alliance and Green party - kept their original position as supporters of the Commission´s arrogant plans.
It remains to be seen, how Finland´s changed view affects EU policy. It would, however, be a benefit for the whole EU to change it to become fairer. For Finland the current plans would be roughly equal if Germany was demanded to reduce its car industry by 30% or Netherlands was forced to return 30% of its dried sea coasts back to a seabed.
Actually, the leader of EU Commission´s current environmental policy - Frans Timmermans - should understand that only fair policy towards all member states will build a strong Union capable to respond to challenges posed by other economic great powers USA and China. And therefore, even small members should be respected instead of making efforts to destroy their preconditions of living.
Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Share of EU recovery funds will turn attitudes more negative
A new justification is needed for environmental activists
Finnish parties agreed on actions against the climatic change
