The EU could be investing tens of billions of euros each year into activities that damage biodiversity, according to a new report from WWF.
With biodiversity declining at an unprecedented rate around the world, the EU intends to put nature on a “path to recovery” by 2030, in line with global goals.
Finance is a key part of this and the bloc has pledged to raise at least €20bn in nature funding each year by the end of the decade.
However, a new report estimates that EU countries could be spending between €34-48bn each year on projects that can end up damaging biodiversity in sectors such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries.
It is “pretty shocking” to see the potential scale of funding that EU countries are “pouring into harmful practices”, the lead author of the report tells Carbon Brief.
A policy expert, who was not involved in the report, says the findings may increase pressure on the EU to track its harmful subsidies, but criticised some of what the report counted as ‘“harmful”.
Tackling harmful subsidies
There is no standard definition for “biodiversity-harmful subsidies”, but, essentially, they are government incentives that supplement income or lower costs for certain activities that end up damaging biodiversity.
Agriculture, fishery and energy subsidies are most commonly termed “harmful”, but damage can also be caused by subsidies for other sectors, including forestry, infrastructure, transport, construction and water.
Subsidies that harm nature and the environment cost the world around $1.8tn each year, according to a 2022 report from two coalition industry groups – equivalent to the entire GDP of Canada.
There are a number of global goals in place to reduce these harmful subsidies.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the global deal for nature signed at the UN COP15 biodiversity summit in 2022, includes a target to cut biodiversity-harming incentives, including subsidies, by at least $500bn per year by 2030. The target also aims to identify such incentives by 2025, although the EU has so far not done so.
The new analysis finds that the EU is allocating between €34-48bn every year to subsidise activities that harm biodiversity. The table below shows the upper and lower estimates for each sector examined.
| Sector | Lower estimate of biodiversity harmful subsidies (€) | Upper estimate of biodiversity harmful subsidies (€) |
|---|---|---|
| Agriculture and forestry | 31.35bn | 32.57bn |
| Fisheries | 60m | 140m |
| Transport infrastructure | 1.69bn | 14.07bn |
| Water | 1.33bn | 2.09bn |
| Total | 34.43bn | 48.87bn |
This largest proportion of funding comes from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the EU’s farming-subsidy programme, which accounts for almost one-third of the bloc’s total budget. (See “agricultural impact” below.)
The subsidies include funds that support “unsustainable” farming, land-use changes, river fragmentation and deforestation, according to the report. It adds that these activities can have knock-on effects on biodiversity, including habitat loss, ecosystem degradation and species extinction.
Prof Alan Matthews, a European agricultural policy expert at Trinity College Dublin, says the findings start a “good debate” about measuring these subsidies. He tells Carbon Brief:
“I see the report as contributing to the pressure on the EU…to actually come up with its own identification of what the subsidies are, so that they can begin then in the next few years to actually reduce them.”
Direct links
The study, conducted by the Netherlands-based economics consultancy Trinomics for WWF, looks at the biodiversity-harming elements of the EU’s long-term budget, the 2021-27 Multiannual Financial Framework.
It focuses on direct financing for the agricultural, forestry, fishery, transport and water sectors that may be damaging to biodiversity. This financing includes grants, loans and direct payments.
It does not look at indirect subsidies, such as tax breaks, or infrastructure investments that disproportionately benefit certain industries, such as tax reductions on fertilisers.
Tycho Vandermaesen, the policy and strategy director at WWF EU and lead author of the report, says there is an overlap between subsidies that damage biodiversity and those that exacerbate climate change, such as fossil fuel subsidies. But the climate impacts were not examined in the report. He says:
“We have taken a very conscious choice here to only look at biodiversity-harmful subsidies because this is one of the most under-highlighted environmentally harmful subsidies – in contrast to climate or fossil-fuel subsidies, which have by now been well researched.”
Matthews notes that the overall findings of the report are in line with previous research, but he criticises some parts of the methodology, such as including a very wide range of direct payments for farmers, as potentially harmful.
In response, Vandermaesen says the assumption on the harmful nature of direct payments for farmers is based on findings in existing studies.
On Monday, the EU Council approved a targeted review of the CAP to assess, among other things, plans to give farmers “greater flexibility” to comply with environmental terms for their direct payments.
The report is clear that there are uncertainties and a lack of up-to-date information on EU spending in some sectors. It says the findings are estimates and that more comprehensive analysis would be required to fully measure these subsidies.
Agricultural impact
Agriculture and forestry receive the most funding for biodiversity-damaging activities out of any sector examined in the report, as shown in the chart below.
The report notes that several EU funds “allocate money in a way that encourages large-scale unsustainable farming or forestry practices”.
These include direct farmer payments based on farm size, which can incentivise boosting industrial livestock numbers and expanding conventional crop production – “both of which harm the environment”, according to the report.
It estimates that around 60% of CAP funding – meaning more than €30bn each year – can be considered harmful to biodiversity.
The current CAP plan, which took effect in 2023 and will remain until 2027, included more environmental measures than previous iterations of the policy. But critics told Carbon Brief in 2021 that the plan was riddled with “loopholes” and unlikely to bring significant change to the sector.
Agriculture accounts for more than 10% of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions. Globally, the sector is also a key driver of forest loss, causing 80% of deforestation as forest lands are cleared to make space for livestock, palm oil and soya beans.
Looking at other sectors, the report outlines that 5-12% of the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund – a fishery funding programme – is put towards biodiversity-harmful subsidies.
This is up to 2.5 times higher than the money from this fund aiming to protect and restore biodiversity, the report says.
The report says it is “challenging” to accurately estimate the impact that building transport infrastructure can have on biodiversity, noting that it can fragment habitats and ecosystems. It estimates that the EU spends anywhere between €1.7bn and €14bn each year on roads, railways and other transport infrastructure that could be harmful to biodiversity.
Funds used for certain water infrastructure, such as flood control dams, could also harm biodiversity, the research notes.
Making changes
The report contains a number of recommendations to put an end to these subsidies, including implementing a legally binding framework to phase out biodiversity-harmful subsidies on both EU and national levels. It adds:
“Inclusiveness and social awareness need to be included in the phase-out of biodiversity-harmful subsidies to avoid regions or industries being left behind or struggling with the transition.”
Vandermaesen says that consulting with the impacted sectors and giving a clear pathway to diverting these subsidies is a “really important” step. He adds:
“We do not want to see a situation where, from one day to the next, these subsidies are basically stopped without the involvement of these communities.”
The report recommends diverting the funding instead for public investments to protect and restore ecosystems and to put in place “ambitious” national biodiversity plans ahead of the COP16 biodiversity summit, which is scheduled to be hosted by Colombia later this year.
WWF recently asked European political parties whether they would commit to redirecting fossil fuel and other environmentally harmful subsidies towards the “green transition”. All parties that responded expressed a readiness to redirect these subsidies, but the NGO says that “only a few have committed to enshrining this redirection into law”.
The subsidies report includes a number of case studies of nature-harming subsidies across Europe.
A forest recovery plan in France, financed partly by the EU, has had “adverse effects” on forests, the report outlines. Almost nine out of 10 projects financed by the plan in 2021 and 2022 involved clearcutting of trees, which can weaken ecosystems.
The report details another example in Bulgaria, where farmers were permitted to let animals graze in areas of the country’s national parks to help preserve open areas.
This led to “vegetation being trampled, water being polluted and wildlife being disturbed”, the report says. To mitigate these effects, park administrations requested €760,000 from the country’s EU-funded environment programme.
These examples “illustrate how complex it can be actually on the ground to deliver these positive results”, Matthews says, adding:
“In quite a number of the case studies, actually the subsidies were intended to be positive for biodiversity. But it seems that the way they were implemented…They had these sort of perverse outcomes.”
The post EU spending up to €48bn on nature-harming activities each year, report says appeared first on Carbon Brief.
EU spending up to €48bn on nature-harming activities each year, report says
But a $345 million U.S. verdict against the environmental group hangs over the case.
A lawsuit filed by Greenpeace International against the U.S.-based fossil fuel company Energy Transfer in the Netherlands is moving forward after a Dutch court recently ruled in favor of the environmental organization in rejecting the company’s bid to toss out the case.
Greenpeace’s Dutch Anti-SLAPP Case Against Oil Pipeline Giant Advances
Go behind the scenes with executive editor Vernon Loeb and oceans correspondent Teresa Tomassoni as they discuss the search for heat-resilient coral reefs that are somehow defying the odds to survive a warming planet.
The world has already lost more than half of its coral reefs, and most of what remains is at risk of disappearing in the next 25 years.
Climate Change
DeBriefed 19 June 2026: Bonn talks end in ‘gridlock’ | Energy’s ‘new era’ | Oceans in climate negotiations
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Bonn talks close
‘SIDE-STEPPING AND STALLING’: UN climate talks in Bonn have ended in “gridlock”, according to Climate Home News. The outlet reported on the failure to balance developing countries’ need for climate-adaptation finance with “richer nations’ desire to move forward” on emissions cuts. It added that both topics were subject to “rule 16”, meaning no agreement could be reached and work will be pushed to the COP31 summit in Turkey. Inside Climate News quoted UN climate executive secretary Simon Stiell, who said the talks had seen “side-stepping and stalling”.
JUST TRANSITION: One “glimmer of hope” came from negotiations on achieving a “just transition”, reported Euronews. The news outlet said negotiators “made headway on operationalising the Belém-Antalya mechanism”, intended to support people in the shift to a low-carbon economy. However, Politico concluded that much of the focus in Bonn had “shift[ed] to efforts outside diplomatic talks – raising questions about the future of global climate negotiations”.
‘ATTACKING SCIENCE’: Agence France-Presse reported on the EU, Switzerland and “dozens of developing nations” warning of “attacks on science” by a “small group of fossil-fuels interests” in Bonn. Table Briefings explained that “the 1.5C target is increasingly being challenged” and the role of the UN climate-science panel – the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – in an upcoming assessment of global climate progress “remains controversial”. See Carbon Brief’s full write-up of the talks for more detail.
US-Iran deal
PRICE DROP: The US and Iran announced that they have reached an interim agreement to halt the war and reopen the strait of Hormuz, reported Bloomberg. Oil prices have fallen, as the “long-awaited deal” began the process of “eas[ing]” the global energy crisis triggered by the conflict, according to the New York Times. The Associated Press noted that high fuel prices will “likely outlast the Iran war”.
‘OIL GLUT’: The Financial Times reported that the International Energy Agency (IEA) has forecast a “glut of oil” emerging next year, if the peace deal holds. The IEA said this would allow countries to build new strategic reserves, as they “review their energy strategies and policies in response to the crisis”, according to Reuters.
‘NEW ERA’: Agence France-Presse reported that oil and gas companies have “few illusions about a return to normal for the Gulf energy industry after more than three months of blockage”. One analyst told the newswire that the war “showed the oil and gas industry that Hormuz risk is no longer just a geopolitical headline”.
Around the world
- OCEAN MONITOR: The Trump administration is “abandoning its plan” to dismantle a $368m ocean monitoring system key for tracking climate change after a “bipartisan backlash on Capitol Hill”, reported the New York Times.
- CORAL HAVEN: The New York Times covered preliminary research, presented at the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya, suggesting there could be three times as many “coral refugia” – where corals are relatively safe from climate change – than previously thought.
- BAD CREDIT: Down to Earth reported that the first carbon credits issued under the Paris Agreement’s new Article 6.4 mechanism are “facing scrutiny over alleged links to institutions controlled by Myanmar’s military junta”.
- OIL BACKTRACK: Reuters reported that oil-and-gas company Equinor has dropped a renewable-energy target and scaled back clean investments, while another Reuters story noted that Shell is selling off its offshore wind assets.
1.1 billion
The number of children facing “at least three overlapping climate hazards”, according to a new Unicef report covered by Agence France-Presse.
Latest climate research
- Including the “permafrost carbon-climate feedback” in climate models increases the chance of exceeding “tipping elements” – such as the Greenland ice sheets, Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation or Amazon rainforest – by up to 50% | Environmental Research Letters
- The intensity of influenza outbreaks could decline in temperate regions, but increase in tropical areas over the next century, as the climate warms | PNAS Nexus
- European snow cover has declined by 20% for December and January since the start of the industrial era, revealing an “unprecedented ongoing shrinkage of European winters” | Communications Earth & Environment
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
The more than 2m battery electric vehicles (BEVs), 1m “plug-in” hybrids (PHEVs) and 100,000 electric vans on UK roads are already saving drivers a total of around £3bn a year, according to new Carbon Brief analysis. This amounts to savings of more than £1,100 a year in fuel costs for each BEV driver in the UK. The analysis comes amid reports in UK media this week that the government is considering “watering down” its EV sales targets.
Spotlight
Oceans rising at UN climate talks
The state of the world’s oceans is inextricably linked to the changing climate – and many delegates at UN climate talks want to see more focus on this issue, reports Carbon Brief.
Oceans are often described as the world’s “greatest ally” against climate change – absorbing 30% of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and most of the heat generated by those emissions.
They are also the site of important climate solutions, such as huge offshore windfarms and the shipping industry’s transition to cleaner fuels.
At the same time, the oceans themselves present a growing danger to coastal communities and sea life due to sea level rise, marine heatwaves and ocean acidification.
These diverse issues have led to growing calls within the UN climate process for more focus on oceans. During climate negotiations this week in Bonn – known as SB64 – nations and civil society had a chance to air these views during an “ocean and climate change dialogue”.
‘Elevate action’
Oceans first entered UN climate outcomes in 2019, when the final COP25 negotiated text requested a new “dialogue” on “the ocean and climate change to consider how to strengthen mitigation and adaptation action”.
The following years saw this dialogue established as an annual event. However, the political weight of these discussions has been limited.
COP31 is being co-led by Turkey and Australia, but with Pacific islands playing a supporting role. These small islands sometimes self-identify as “large ocean states”, stressing the ocean’s centrality in their societies.
In Bonn, figures from across the presidency threw their weight behind this issue. Chris Bowen, an Australian minister and incoming COP31 “president of negotiations”, told attendees:
“Australia, Turkey and the Pacific see an important opportunity to elevate ocean-based climate action.”
Strategies and finance
The two-day dialogue in Bonn involved a series of panels, statements and breakout groups.
One of the main topics was how oceans are integrated into national climate plans under the Paris Agreement, known as “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs).
Three-quarters of the latest round of NDCs mention oceans, with conservation of “blue carbon” ecosystems the most frequently described action. (Landscapes such as mangroves can both absorb CO2 and protect coastal areas.)
Delegates also discussed alignment with the UN biodiversity process, as well as ocean finance, which currently makes up less than 1% of all climate finance.
(As discussions were taking place in Bonn, country officials also gathered in Mombasa, Kenya for the 11th Our Ocean Conference. Carbon Brief’s associate editor Giuliana Viglione attended the conference and will publish a full summary shortly.)
Developing countries were clear that many of the ocean-related actions in their NDCs would depend on receiving more financial support.
‘Political momentum’
With the backing of the COP31 presidency, delegates were hopeful about where this year’s dialogue could lead.
Charles Hamilton, an advisor for the Bahamas who spoke for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in the dialogue, told Carbon Brief that island representatives “are not traveling thousands of miles to just talk and pat ourselves on the back”. He added:
“A dialogue that just remains a dialogue is just more talk – no action.”
Given that, he said “discussions in the dialogue must move into COP decisions and the decisions must be actioned”, noting the importance of finance.
Marina Corrêa, oceans lead at WWF-Brazil, pointed to an upcoming UN climate change Standing Committee on Finance forum as a space to ramp up pressure on ocean finance.
More broadly, she wanted to see the presidencies translate their support into a “leader-level ocean initiative” that could “mainstream” oceans across negotiations.
“We have a really interesting opportunity, in terms of political momentum,” Corrêa told Carbon Brief.
Watch, read, listen
‘HOTTER THAN HELL’: An episode of the BBC’s Rare Earth podcast titled “hotter than hell” considered the issue of extreme heat, with input from experts and “people facing up to the hottest temperatures on the planet”.
NOT BROKEN?: John Drake, a professor of ecology at the University of Georgia, wrote an essay for Aeon – also re-published as a Guardian “long read” – questioning the framing of ecosystems and climate systems “breaking down”.
ON COURSE: On his Volts podcast, US climate journalist David Roberts interviewed UK climate minister Katie White, quizzing her about whether the UK will “stay the course with its climate plans”.
Coming up
- 20-28 June: London climate action week
- 21 June: Colombia presidential runoff
- 24 June: UK Climate Change Committee progress in reducing emissions 2026 report to parliament
Pick of the jobs
- Mongabay, managing editor – Africa | Salary: Unknown. Location: Global
- Contexte, environment reporter – Brussels | Salary: €45,000-€60,000. Location: Brussels
- Climate 200, communications director | Salary: Unknown. Location: Australia
- Energy Tracker Asia, energy transition correspondent | Salary: $3,000-$4,000 per month. Location: South-east Asia (remote)
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 19 June 2026: Bonn talks end in ‘gridlock’ | Energy’s ‘new era’ | Oceans in climate negotiations appeared first on Carbon Brief.
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测