A clash is raging between nature and finance. On the one hand, the EU is striving to improve the deteriorating state of nature across Europe, with initiatives like the Biodiversity Strategy 2030 and the European Green Deal. On the other, massive amounts of public money continue to flow to infrastructure projects with devastating impacts on the natural world. Our work where finance meets the natural world advocates for adequate protection and restoration projects to ensure a green future for all.
IN FOCUS
Rivers and communities
The countries of the Energy Community Treaty have diverse energy mixes, but hydropower has traditionally played a strong role in many of them. Albania is almost completely reliant on dams for its domestic electricity generation, followed by Georgia with an average of 80 per cent of electricity generated by hydropower and Montenegro with an average of 55 per cent.
EU funds and biodiversity
In May 2020, EU leaders committed to an ambitious Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, outlining the clear need to act on biodiversity loss and address the failing health of nature.
Discussions are now underway to agree on a new EU budget which will run from 2027 to 2034. This represents a golden opportunity to improve biodiversity spending to achieve the objectives of the biodiversity strategy in full.
As well as addressing the biodiversity crisis, strategically supporting nature through EU funds is also one of the most effective ways to tackle climate change, while providing jobs and improved health at the same time.
Yet, with many of the previous strategy’s objectives left unachieved, the pressure now mounts for this decade. Never before has there been so much potential – and urgency – to use EU funds and investments to address the biodiversity crisis.
Related projects
Free-flowing rivers in Central Asia
Central Asian rivers are under threat from hundreds of new hydropower plants. We have created a map of the key rivers in the region that need urgent protection and are calling on the development banks to stop their destruction.
Emerald Network in the Western Balkans
Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia are required to establish a sufficient number of Emerald Network sites as signatories to the Bern Convention. However, since 2011, not a single new site has been proposed and many stunning rivers remain unprotected. The #EmeraldForRivers campaign aims to support governments in expanding the Emerald Network.
Turnu Măgurele – Nikopol Hydraulic Structures Assembly on the Danube river, Romania and Bulgaria
The project, if built, would not only devastate critical habitats, leading to the potential extinction of species such as the Danube sturgeons, but also displace local communities, disrupt existing investments, and violate several EU environmental directives.
Latest news
Albania’s Skavica dam can’t get off the ground – time to finally cancel it!
Blog entry | 24 November, 2025The highly damaging hydropower project could hardly have had stronger political support at its inception, with the country’s parliament passing a special law in 2021 to appoint U.S. construction giant Bechtel as the main contractor. But four years later, the project has stagnated, with no environmental permit and no financing.
Read moreRomania’s Parliament paves the way for environmental destruction and ‘foreign agent’ repression
Blog entry | 20 October, 2025Romania stands at a dangerous crossroads. Last week, a law initiated by the senator Daniel Zamfir in 2022 and already then rejected by the Senate, passed by a crushing majority (262–33) in the decisive Deputies Chamber.
Read moreExpanding the Emerald Network: Progress and gaps in the Western Balkans
Blog entry | 9 October, 2025At the 15th meeting of the Bern Convention’s Group of Experts on Protected Areas and Ecological Networks – held from 7 to 8 October 2025 in Bar, Montenegro – participants reviewed progress towards establishing the Emerald Network of protected areas. As part of the programme, the group visited Lake Skadar, one of Montenegro’s key Emerald sites, acknowledging the government’s efforts to safeguard this unique ecosystem.
Read moreRelated publications
Just transition project implementation checklist
Checklist | 29 April, 2022 | Download PDFThe paper outlines what comes next after the preparation of the Territorial Just Transition Plans and their final approval by the European Commission. It takes a look not only at the actual planning and spending of the funds provided in accordance with the approved Plans, but also at the challenges faced by the regions and the level to which they are prepared to address them. The checklist provides an easy-to-use overview of what each region should have in place in order to make sure it reaches its professed goals along with a discussion of each issue, relevant examples and references to more detailed reports, documents or regulations concerning particular points.
Breaking down the ‘do no significant harm’ principle
Briefing | 7 April, 2022 | Download PDFThis briefing aims to explain the ‘do no significant harm’ principle and how it has been used in the Recovery and Resilience Facility. It also raises concerns over the long-term risks and implications of applying the ‘do no significant harm’ principle
Flagships or red flags? Risks of proposed flagship infrastructure projects under the Economic and Investment Plan for the Western Balkans
Briefing | 24 March, 2022 | Download PDFUnder the European Commission’s October 2020 Economic and Investment Plan for the Western Balkans, the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) is set to provide grants worth EUR 9 billion, with up to EUR 20 billion more in investments leveraged through the Western Balkans Guarantee Facility. Western Balkan governments have proposed projects for financing in ten Flagship areas for investment. The list of these proposed projects contains many which appear reasonable and much-needed, but many others are not in line with EU policy and/or legislation and must not be funded with EU money. This briefing provides an overview of selected projects that have been nominated by governments but which are not in line with EU policy and/or legislation.
