Nature Conservation and Restoration Work Under Threat

The LIFE Programme and the Nature Restoration Regulation are under threat! Two essential structures for nature conservation and Protected Areas. 

The LIFE Programme: enabling conservation throughout Europe

Protected Areas are pros when it comes to nature conservation and restoration work. It is what those working in our natural heritage do all day, every day. European funds are crucial for this work. For over 30 years, the LIFE Programme has funded conservation and restoration actions in Protected Areas — safeguarding not just nature, but people’s right to live on a healthy planet. Often national funds are not enough to cover these investments in our future and EU funds are fundamental to cover that gap.

The very effective LIFE Programme has also enabled Protected Areas to search for partners and co-operate with many organisations and institutions. It broke down silos by creating opportunities to reach out to other sectors, achieving impressive results in ambitious, large scale and multifaceted LIFE projects. It has indeed brought the nature sector closer to those with whom we do not often collaborate, or who may even have opposing views. That is exactly the power of LIFE: it strengthens the work of Protected Areas by fostering the exchange of experience with other sectors and facilitates the sharing of knowledge among the different LIFE projects across the EU.

The Nature Restoration Law: a beacon of hope for Europe’s nature

The Nature Restoration Regulation, aka the Nature Restoration Law (NRL), entered into force in August 2024. It was the result of months of negotiations and can be considered a beacon of hope for Europe’s nature. It is time to remind our EU and national decision-makers that nature restoration brings many benefits for society! Natural and restored habitats can mitigate climate change and protect us from natural disasters, like flooding. According to the World Economic Forum (2020), more than half of global GDP and two thirds of the EU’s added economic value depend on nature and its ecosystem services. Destruction of nature is a big driver of economic losses and financial risks. When we invest in nature restoration, we are investing EU’s “competitiveness, resilience, prosperity and security” (as stated in the Roadmap towards Nature Credits, COM (2025) 374).

Recent developments form a threat to conservation in Europe

Now all this is under attack. The proposal for the next European Union Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028‒2034, aka the EU Budget, was published by the European Commission in July 2025, and negotiations are ongoing. As we pointed out in our September article, there was an unexpected and unwelcome surprise in the proposal: the exclusion of the LIFE Programme.

If the LIFE Programme does not continue, nature conservation and restoration, implementation of the Natura 2000 network, maintenance of nature’s contributions to people, protection of threatened species and habitats, as well as the functioning of organisations and institutions managing these, are under direct threat. They will be facing serious problems as the LIFE funding is crucial for these actions. This is not just about protecting species or habitats: this is about protecting the health and lives of European citizens. At the very least, there needs to be earmarked funding for nature conservation and restoration and biodiversity action in the EU Budget and in the proposed funds. The ambition and value of this funding should not be lower than the current funding.

And there is more in store from the European side: the Nature Restoration Regulation, very recently approved, is now being considered for simplification. Such process would result in legal uncertainty, and surely in implementation delays of the much-needed restoration action in the EU. Furthermore, whilst we can all agree that “simplification” is in principle a positive action when it comes to bureaucracy, it might be more challenging to explain why a piece of legislation that has just been approved one year ago already needs to be considered for simplification. Overall, just the consideration of a brand-new regulation – that already had a difficult process to be approved – to be reviewed one year on, can raise some questions about the reasoning behind.

What can we do?

We, the Protected Area Community of Europe,

• Can try to talk to our country’s ministry that is responsible for environmental issues. More importantly, talk to your country’s finance ministry. Try to explain to them how important the LIFE Programme is for your Protected Area. Tell the story of how effective LIFE has been, and is, and as such should be one of the clear EU funding lines that should stay. Underline to them how important nature is for society and how essential it is to fund its protection and restoration.

• Spread the word! The time to act is now!