Balancing nature and economic interests in the European Union: On the concept of mitigation under the Habitats Directive
| Author | Lorenzo Squintani |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12292 |
| Published date | 01 April 2020 |
| Date | 01 April 2020 |
RECIEL. 2020;29:129–137.
|
129
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/reel
1 | INTRODUCTION
Despite the pre dominant measu re in European Unio n (EU) nature
conservati on law – the Habitat s Directive1 – pass ing its fitne ss
check,2 the stat us of nature conser vation in the EU doe s not look
good.3 Habitat s – especially the Europea n priority areas forming t he
Nature 200 0 network establis hed under the Habitat s Directive – are
under consta nt pressure due to hu man activit ies. During the e co‐
nomic crisis that s tarted in 20 08, reforms of permitting p rocedures
took place in sever al Member State s to foster economi c recovery.4
The pursuit of cli mate change mitigation highli ghts the at times diffi‐
cult relationship between nature conservation and renewable energy
projects.5 More generally, the pursuit of economic welfare, coupled
with the abund ant supply of agric ultural produ cts, are a cons tant
threat to this environmental field.6
Member States a nd project developers s earch for as much room
as possible to pur sue their acti vities under EU a nd national natur e
conservati on legal framewo rks. One provis ion of the Habitat s
Directive seems to attract particular creativity of national legisla‐
tors, public au thorities and und ertakings: A rticle 6(3).7 This provision
requires publ ic authorities to assess the ef fects of any plan or proj‐
ect that, pote ntially, significantly aff ects the conservat ion goals and
status of a Natur a 2000 site. If a plan or p roject has a negative ef fect
on such goals, aut horization sho uld be denied. M ember States
clearly have an inc entive to avoid this prov ision halting soc io‐eco‐
nomic development, including in the field of energy transition. The
1 CouncilDi rective(E EC)92/43of21M ay1992onthe Conserva tionofNatu ralHabit ats
and of Wild Fauna a nd Flora [1997] OJ L305/42 (Ha bitats Direc tive).
2 Commission ( EU), ‘Evaluatio n Study to Suppo rt the Fitnes s Check of the Bir ds and
Habitats Directives’ (March 2016) envir onmen t/natur e/legis latio n/
fitne ss_check/ docs/study_evalu ation_suppo rt_fitne ss_check_nature_direc tives.pdf>.
3 EuropeanEnvi ronmentAge ncy(EEA),‘ Environmen talIndica torReport2018 ’(EEA2018).
4 Foradiscussiononlegi slativereform stospeedupdevelopm entconsentproce dures,see
thecont ributions inB Vanheusden andL Squintan i(eds), EU Environmental Planning Law
Aspects of La rge‐scale Proj ects (Intersentia 2016).
5 See on this ten sion Case C‐2/10, Azienda Agro‐Zootecnica Franchini sarl and Eolica di
Altamura Srl v Regione Puglia,ECLI:EU:C:2011:502.
6 EEA,Effec ts of Air Polluti on on European Ec osystems (EEA 2 014) Annex 4.
7 G Wandesford e‐Smith and NSJ Wat ts, ‘Wild life Conserv ation and Prote cted Areas:
Politics, P rocedure, a nd the Perf ormance of Fai lure under t he EU Birds and H abitats
Directive s’ (2014) 17 Jour nal of Inter nationa l Wildli fe Law and Po licy 62; F Ki stenka s,
‘Rethinking European Nature Conservation Legislation: Towards Sustainable
Developme nt’(2013)10JournalforEurope anEnvironment alandPlanningLaw72,72and
83; H Schouken s, ‘Habitat s Restorat ion Measure s as Facilitator s for Economi c
Developme ntwithi nthe Context ofEU Habitats Direct ive:Bal ancingN oNet Losswi th
thePreventiveApproach?’(2017)29JournalofEnvironmentalLaw47;HSchoukensand
A Cliquet, ‘M itigation an d Compensati on under EU Natur e Conservat ion Law in the
FlemishRe gion:Beyo ndtheDe adlockfo rDevelop mentProje cts’(2014) 10Utrecht Law
Review194,207.
DOI: 10 .1111/reel .12292
CASE N OTE
Balancing nature and economic interests in the European
Union: On the concept of mitigation under the Habitats
Directive
Lorenzo Squintani
Thisisanopenac cessarticl eundertheter msoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution‐NonCommercialLicense ,whichpermit suse,distr ibutionandre productio n
in any medium, p rovided the origin al work is properly ci ted and is not used for com mercial purpose s.
© 2019 The Author. Review o f European, Compa rative & International E nvironmental LawPu blishedbyJoh nWiley&SonsLtd.
Correspondence
Email: l.squintani@rug.nl The Habitats Di rective and, more s pecifically, its provis ions on site protection have
beenthesubjectofseveraljudgmentsbytheCourtofJusticeoftheEuropeanUnion.
These judgment s have progressively clarified the balan ce between nature conserva‐
tionintere stsa ndecono micones. Following are centjudgm entof theCo urtab out
the managing of nitrogen d eposition in Natura 200 0 sites, this contribution high lights
the known and unknow n aspects of this legal field. It un derlines in particular the im‐
portance of fur ther clarification of the s tandards to pursue a program matic approach
in nature conserva tion and to evaluate science‐based evidence in co urt.
To continue reading
Request your trial