Norway’s double standards – Dagsavisen
On the same day that the outgoing Minister of Climate and Environment Sveinung Rotevatn spoke on part one of the UN’s nature negotiations, the outgoing government presented its latest state budget.
[ Ingen forventer ny Candy Crush-minister, Støre ]
Unfortunately, there is no particular correspondence between Norway’s big and fine words in international negotiations, and we can deliver that from concrete measures and appropriations in our own budget.
In relation to the countries of the world in the nature negotiations, Rotevatn was clear that we must use this unique opportunity to collaborate on management to solve the nature and climate crisis. In particular, a goal of 30 per cent of nature and 100 per cent sustainable management of nature areas was highlighted, as well as the importance of scaling up «nature-based solutions».
It is important to note that the concept of “nature-based solutions” has been criticized for being both vague and unclear.
We expect the Norwegian delegation to specify exactly what they include in the term – if not, we risk that a “nature-based solution” could be at the expense of indigenous peoples’ rights. In addition, sub-items to this goal of 30 per cent, which can be made to be implemented in a socially just manner, have yet to be formulated.
All in all, the promises to Rotevatn from the rostrum were still quite ambitious for Norway to be.
In parallel with these big, nice words to Norway from the UN rostrum, the whole of Norwegian civil society and interest organizations sat with the new state budget in front of them, to find out how allocations will affect their work and areas of interest. In Spire, we looked at the budget items that have to do with climate and nature management. Her drawer Norway.
In the press release to the state budget, the Solberg government once again boasted of all the measures they had allocated money for in nature. Here they highlighted, among other things, restoration. It is great that the previous government is proposing a smaller increase here. In particular, bogs and wetlands were highlighted as essential in the restoration work – a type of nature that is absolutely essential for both biological diversity and climate adaptation.
[ NRK-profil: – Jeg føler de tenker: Hun har fått jobben fordi hun ser utenlandsk ut ]
The Solberg government’s proposal for restoration in the state budget is nevertheless only small debris compared with measures that will help to further destroy nature – such as the budget for new oil activities in vulnerable areas. In addition, we have measures to offer that nature needs to be restored at all. The best way to protect nature is not to ruin the first round.
Restoration alone is not something to do with the serious natural crisis we are in.
The Solberg government also boasted a lot about another measure they are proposing to budget for – namely an increase in the allocation for the municipality’s work to ensure biodiversity. The municipalities play a significant role when it comes to Norwegian nature.
Therefore, it is important, and right, that the record for it works is increased.
The problem is that it can hardly be called an increase. For the previous budget, the government gave one million kroner. This million was to be shared between all the municipalities in Norway to ensure biodiversity. Now, in this proposal for the state budget, the Solberg government will increase it to as much as three million kroner. This is a direct mockery of the municipalities’ important work to ensure nature. It becomes especially clear when at the same time NOK 67 million was allocated to leave me for more oil on the Norwegian shelf.
Now the new Støre government has a completely unique chance. The Hurdal platform states that they will take a “stand for nature”, and emphasizes that Norway will be an active driving force in the work to ensure the best possible nature agreements during the UN summit.
The state budget, as it stands today, is far from matching Norway’s promises and obligations internationally.
It is not without reason that Norway has been branded a double standard in the international media no, to, three and Fire times. If the new government is to have any legitimacy in climate and nature negotiations, they must have a coherent approach to the environmental crisis. Big, nice words have to be handled.