“When I started this job, I said it was important to others [electoral] the term is to make the loss of biodiversity one of the biggest issues of the time alongside the climate crisis, Minister for the Environment and Climate Change Emma Kari (Green) comments Helsingin Sanomat on Wednesday.
“[Biodiversity loss] is also making progress in Finnish nature. One of the nine species is endangered. Half of the habitats are endangered. “
Before the broadcast discussion, Kari complained to the newspaper that decision-makers may not consider the loss of biodiversity as as serious a problem as the climate crisis. However, he expressed gratitude to the coalition partners for finalizing what he considered to be a simplistic proposal and for refusing to comment on conflicts of interest between the Greens and the center.
“There is a perception among the parties that current legislation and measures to prevent biodiversity loss have not been sufficient,” he noted.
The purpose of the reform is to introduce completely new chapters into the Nature Conservation Act, including provisions on endangered habitats, voluntary ecological compensation and management of information on the natural environment.
Other new features include strengthening the protection of habitats, banning ore exploration in national and natural parks, and facilitating the removal of harmful alien species from protected areas.
Ecological compensation refers, for example, to the manager of a municipal or company construction project who compensates for the loss of natural value caused by the project by paying for the protection or restoration of the corresponding natural value area. The aim of the compensation provisions is to create a framework and system for monitoring the nature value market so that landowners can obtain a certificate of the value they produce and businesses and consumers can distinguish between actual compensation and green washing.
Many requests for market clarification came from companies, Kari told Helsingin Sanomat. “This field has been a wild west.”
Pirkka-Pekka Petelius (Greens) argued in the referendum that ecological compensation should be mandatory, but thanked the authors of the reform for bringing the concept into law, saying it could be a way to cut off wealth growth from environmental pollution.
“The goal must not be to buy a clear conscience, but to create incentives to minimize the environmental impact of economic activity,” he stressed.
Kari pointed out that it is difficult to pass on the cause of biodiversity loss to others, unlike the climate crisis.
“Climate debates often ask why we act here, why we don’t focus on China and the United States and their emissions. Here, the whole environment turns on its head, because it is quite clear that no one but us can protect the beautiful nature of Finland, he told Helsingin Sanomat.
The proposal was also praised by the opposition.
“It is positive and important that there is a legal basis for the protection of biodiversity, a more comprehensive concept than traditional nature conservation,” he said. Kai Mykkänen, Chairman of the Coalition Parliamentary Group. “It is also positive that we are creating a legal basis for the economic replacement of environmental management.”
However, the Coalition Party is concerned that the inclusion of endangered habitats in the legislation could lead to disputes over business investment and construction projects, which will be brought to justice.
“We need to find more clarity on this,” he said. “We must not complicate the permit jungle.”
Aleksi Teivainen – HT
Source: The Nordic Page