The Nature Restoration Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 (NRR) calls for a “fair and cross-society” approach to public participation, yet it provides only limited guidance on how this should be done. This article clarifies the legal framework governing public participation in this area, starting with the 1998 Aarhus Convention, the Habitats Directive, and the EIA and SEA Directives, and identifies where further efforts may be needed to ensure that biodiversity restoration efforts are effective and widely supported. First, it reconstructs the current legal framework on public participation in relation to plans and projects implementing the NRR. Next, drawing upon governance literature, it explores the potential benefits of broader public engagement in biodiversity conservation or restoration matters, along with the risks of ill-designed or ineffective engagement. It argues that going beyond legal minimums may not only be beneficial but, in respect of certain binding ecosystem targets, legally compelled. Ultimately, the article argues that even if the legal framework on participation may favour broad and inclusive participation, public authorities must be empowered to go beyond legal minimums and must be given ownership over the Union’s biodiversity goals at a local scale.
Harris, M.E. (2026). Public participation in the implementation of the EU Nature Restoration Regulation: Beyond legal requirements?. In C. Cellerino, M.E. Harris (a cura di), Implementing the Nature Restoration Regulation: Selected Legal Issues (pp. 9-38). Napoli : Editoriale Scientifica srl.
Public participation in the implementation of the EU Nature Restoration Regulation: Beyond legal requirements?
Morgan Eleanor Harris
2026-01-01
Abstract
The Nature Restoration Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 (NRR) calls for a “fair and cross-society” approach to public participation, yet it provides only limited guidance on how this should be done. This article clarifies the legal framework governing public participation in this area, starting with the 1998 Aarhus Convention, the Habitats Directive, and the EIA and SEA Directives, and identifies where further efforts may be needed to ensure that biodiversity restoration efforts are effective and widely supported. First, it reconstructs the current legal framework on public participation in relation to plans and projects implementing the NRR. Next, drawing upon governance literature, it explores the potential benefits of broader public engagement in biodiversity conservation or restoration matters, along with the risks of ill-designed or ineffective engagement. It argues that going beyond legal minimums may not only be beneficial but, in respect of certain binding ecosystem targets, legally compelled. Ultimately, the article argues that even if the legal framework on participation may favour broad and inclusive participation, public authorities must be empowered to go beyond legal minimums and must be given ownership over the Union’s biodiversity goals at a local scale.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


