The implementation of EU environmental policies on the ground
How can ambitious EU environmental policies work for cities on the ground? That was the central question explored during the “Navigating (non)-binding policies across governance levels: the nitty gritty for local and regional authorities” workshop session at EURESFO, where policymakers, researchers, and city representatives came together to unpack the realities of turning European policy ambitions into local action.
The discussion centred around key EU frameworks, including the Nature Restoration Regulation (NRR), the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the EU Soil Monitoring Law. Representing the SPADES project, Mariam Jahnning highlighted how EU environmental policy relies on both binding and non-binding instruments, creating important indirect impacts on areas like spatial planning.
A clear theme was: local governments are expected to deliver ambitious climate and biodiversity targets, but often lack the resources, funding, and direct involvement needed to make implementation possible.
As Louis Durrant (IEEP) put it:
“For cities, the NRR is a legally binding obligation, but it is also an opportunity to explore the co-benefits that restoration can provide.”
Speakers emphasized the urgent need to break down silos between departments, strengthen collaboration across governance levels, and involve citizens directly in shaping greener, more resilient urban spaces. Concrete examples from Guimarães and Milan showed how cities are already embedding nature restoration, climate adaptation, mobility, and public health into integrated long-term planning.
The conversation then opened through an interactive fishbowl discussion, where representatives from Paris and Vienna shared first-hand experiences of working with these policies in practice. Their reflections sparked a wider exchange with participants in the room, generating thoughtful discussions around citizen participation, financing challenges, cross-sector coordination, and the everyday realities of balancing competing land-use priorities.
A particularly important perspective came from smaller municipalities, reminding participants that implementation challenges often look very different depending on local capacity.
As Siim Reinla remarked:
“We contribute a lot to the EU Biodiversity Strategy by accident, not on purpose.”
The session closed with a powerful challenge for policymakers moving forward: How do we ensure EU policies are aligned with each other, so they enable rather than complicate local implementation?
Publishing date: