Danish landowners eager to convert their farmland to nature are being turned away despite having properties in areas designated for biodiversity projects under the Green Tripartite Agreement. A landscape professor and nature organizations are criticizing the gap between political ambitions and reality, pointing to a lack of funding mechanisms for pure biodiversity projects.
Nature Ambitions Hit Funding Roadblock
More than a year after Denmark’s ambitious Green Tripartite Agreement, landowners are discovering a frustrating reality. Those who want to transform their agricultural land into nature reserves are being told there’s no money available, even when their properties fall within designated nature areas in municipal conversion plans.
Henrik Vejre, a professor of landscape management at the University of Copenhagen, doesn’t mince words about the situation. According to him, the problem is straightforward but deeply problematic. When landowners voluntarily come forward wanting to fulfill the municipality’s designations for public purposes, they cannot get support for it.
The professor has closely followed the work of the 23 local tripartite groups tasked with turning political ambitions into reality. Together with colleague Morten Graversgaard, a lecturer in environmental management and agricultural policy from Aarhus University, he recently presented the first full-scale evaluation of their work through the Transform research project.
Missing Financial Mechanisms
The core issue lies in how funding is structured. For designated nature areas that aim to protect drinking water resources or connect biodiversity corridors, landowners lack the same opportunities available for low-lying land or potential wetland projects.
There is simply no fund available when projects focus purely on biodiversity without meeting carbon or nitrogen reduction goals, Vejre explains. One option exists for landowners in nature areas called extensivering, which involves taking agricultural land out of production. However, critics say this scheme is neither economically attractive nor particularly beneficial for biodiversity.
According to available data in the MARS database, which collects reports from local tripartite groups, potential nature areas stretch across 237,522 hectares in total. That’s equivalent to one-third of the island of Zealand. The Agency for Green Land Conversion and Water Environment confirmed this figure, though with the caveat that municipalities and their respective tripartite groups don’t necessarily calculate nature areas the same way.
Declarations Without Action
Vejre’s evaluation reveals a stark contrast in progress. While nitrogen and CO2 initiatives have moved forward quickly, forest and especially nature efforts look far less impressive. Beyond some declarations of intent, progress has been limited.
He makes a clear distinction between nature that can create better conditions for diverse animal and plant life versus wetland projects where grass and shrubs will grow but without the biodiversity currently threatened by large agricultural fields. The difference comes down to concrete goals. Local tripartite groups had specific targets for CO2 and nitrogen but no corresponding benchmarks for forest creation, nature, biodiversity or groundwater protection.
Biodiversity Council Shares Concerns
Signe Normand, chairperson of the Biodiversity Council and professor at Aarhus University, echoes these criticisms. She’s not surprised by the situation. In November, the council analyzed the funding and concluded that substantial money is missing to support conversion to nature.
Looking at the current funding pool, there actually aren’t support schemes targeted at creating more and better nature, Normand points out. She can identify barriers to nature projects in both legislation and the schemes landowners can apply to. The consequence is clear: the necessary work doesn’t get started, even when willingness exists.
Nature Organizations Voice Frustration
Maria Reumert Gjerding, president of the Danish Society for Nature Conservation, also finds it puzzling that landowners in designated nature areas are told their conversion projects cannot proceed with existing schemes. The issue concerns her deeply.
She believes that both her organization, Local Government Denmark and the agricultural sector need to examine this seriously. When landowners raise their hands wanting to help create new nature, they should be celebrated, Gjerding emphasizes.
Minister Disputes Claim
Minister for Green Tripartite Jeppe Bruus disputes that willing landowners in designated nature areas lack schemes to use if they want to convert their fields to nature. However, he stresses that he listens to feedback from both landowners and municipal representatives.
Meanwhile, Henrik Vejre suspects someone is working on the issue in connection with the upcoming biodiversity law. He directs his criticism not at municipalities but at politicians for failing to establish a fund for nature purposes. Right now, they’re missing out on goodwill from landowners and letting down those who genuinely want to make a nature effort.
Urgent Crisis Requires Action
The nature and biodiversity section of the Green Tripartite Agreement begins by stating that Denmark and the world stand in the middle of a nature and biodiversity crisis. Eleven lines later, it notes that work to reverse this development is urgent.
For now, that urgency hasn’t translated into accessible funding for landowners ready to act.
Sources and References
The Danish Dream: Denmark issues formal apology to Greenland spiral victims
The Danish Dream: Ten-year plan aims to transform Danish mental health care
DR: Lodsejere får nej til natur, og det vækker kritik: ‘Det er jo helt gakket. Ganske enkelt’
