What Is the Future of the European Union’s Once Ambitious Green Agenda?

From the rise of the far-right to geopolitical tensions and social pressures, the future of the European Union’s once ambitious climate goals is uncertain.

—

For many years, the European Union (EU) has been at the forefront of climate change action. The 27-member bloc has long acted as a bastion for global environmentalism and green policies. However, in the past few years, the climate and sustainability goals seem to have taken a back seat and no longer figure among the European Commission’s priorities.

The European Green Deal (EDG), adopted in 2020, was the flagship of the Commission’s sustainable policies. The deal covers several policy areas, from mobility to agriculture to energy industry, with the aim of transforming the bloc’s economy for a sustainable future. The EU has set ambitious targets, most notably becoming the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, with an interim goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions of 55% by 2030.

At the time of its adoption, the deal enjoyed widespread support across the aisle, with backing from the center-right majority party European People’s Party (EPP), the center-left second majority Socialist & Democrats (S&D), the centrist coalition Renew and the progressive left-wing coalition Greens/EFA.

However, over the last two years, the original consensus has gradually crumbled, with parties either shifting their attention to other policies or wanting to significantly reshape and remold the limits imposed by the EDG. Two main reasons emerge as to why this transformation happened. 

First, the broader geopolitics of the continent have shifted significantly since the first implementation of the EDG, exposing the vulnerabilities of Europe’s energy infrastructure and underscoring the need for a diversified and resilient energy mix. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 shook the balance of Europe’s transition. With much of the continent’s energy supply coming from Russian natural gas reservoirs, the war caused a spike on the energy prices. On the one hand, the conflict has encouraged, and sped up, the green transition as countries reduced their reliance on fossil fuels. On the other hand, sustainability investments – both financial and political – are likely to become less relevant as defence and security are taking priority in an Europe that is increasingly directed towards a “hard power” stance.

Secondly, the 2024 European parliamentary election saw a historic surge of support for right and far-right parties, which are generally opposed to climate policy action. The new right-wing Parliament majority has been obtained by a coalition of the EPP, Conservatives and Reformists of Europe, and Patriots for Europe (former Identity and Democracy group). While not engaging in outright climate change denialism, the coalition has repeatedly pushed for competitiveness and deregulation, arguing for the economic costs of a green transition.

The European right has also been very receptive to the current backlash against green policies (also known as “greenlash”) by certain sectors of the population that perceive the Green Deal or the “Fit for 55” legislative package as elitist and authoritarian, and not taking into consideration the economic repercussions of the green transition. The right has echoed these sentiments in the legislative field.

While Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are reportedly at the center of the European Commission President von der Leyen’s policy programme, her own party has recently called for a halt on European climate legislation.

The European Commissions’ climate department (DG CLIMA) claimed that the European Green Deal has shifted from an ecological agenda to an industry and competitiveness agenda. This trend had already started in 2022, when, following the Biden administration’s enactment  of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the Commission presented the Green Deal Industry Plan and the Net-Zero Industry Act, in an attempt to remain competitive. 

A first sign of prioritizing industrial competitiveness over green goals can be seen in the approval of the controversial EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement, whose accords have been opposed by climate activists for over two decades for its significant and detrimental environmental consequences. The agreement is expected to accelerate deforestation by up to 25% due to increased demand for agricultural products like soy and sugar – particularly in the already delicate Amazon region. 

The deal supports industries that are already contributing heavily to the climate crisis, such as illegal logging, pesticides, meat industry, and transportation, and it is seen as a major step backwards, with over 450 civil society organisations lobbying to put an end to it.

General environmental backtracking of the EU can be seen throughout various policy areas. Notably, the European Commission has taken steps to weaken the environmental standards within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), critical for achieving the sustainable agricultural development goals of the Green Deal. 

Following widespread farmers’ protests in France, Spain, Poland, Italy and Belgium, the Commission backtracked on several green programs by granting partial exemptions and derogations for European farmers. For example, in February 2024, it withdrew its proposal on the sustainable use of pesticides.

The EU has also recently delayed the enforcement of its landmark Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which aims to ban the import of commodities linked to deforestation. Originally set to take effect on December 30, 2024, the new timeline pushes the implementation date to December 30, 2025 for large enterprises, and June 30, 2026, for small businesses. The decision to delay enforcement was influenced by significant lobbying from various stakeholders, including businesses and exporting countries such as Brazil, concerned about compliance challenges. The European Commission proposed the delay in response to these pressures, allowing additional time for companies to prepare for the requirements

You might also like: All You Need to Know About the EU Deforestation Regulation

There are doubts over whether or not the EU will manage to reconcile its ambitious sustainability goals with the renewed priorities in the agenda, now more focused on competitiveness and security. As scientists warn that climate change effects may soon become irreversible, the EU’s policy response to the climate crisis seems too slow to be effective.

Luckily, an implementation of the EGD is far from hopeless. A strong ally can be found in a strong public backing. The climate cause is indeed still dear to a large part of the EU electorate, with polls suggesting that over half of the European voters, some 52%, still believe that the fight against climate change is a priority that must be tackled by the EU. 

However, this public support is not unconditional. While Europeans do want to take action on the climate crisis, some groups of the population, such as farmers and small business owners, do not want to bear the costs of the transition themselves. Such queries are generally considered fair, and supposedly covered by the EDG’s own mission of a “just and socially fair transition” that leaves no one behind. For example, initiatives such as the Just Transition Fund aim to mitigate the economic impact on these groups. Strengthening these measures through transparent implementation and active social engagement will be crucial to maintaining public trust and participation.

In addition to public support, the EU ought to demonstrate its capacity to lead by example. From expanding renewable energy capacity to financing effective green technologies, the EGD can make the bloc hold true to its original ambition of representing a global benchmark for sustainable development and climate leadership, inspiring other nations to follow suit in the transition to a greener and more equitable future.