Nature credits and the nature values market are currently among the hottest topics of discussion in Brussels. The Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners in Finland (MTK) is taking an active part in the debates and meetings, because we see great potential here for forest owners and for nature.

Both in Finland and in the European Union, innovative solutions must be found to improve the protection of biodiversity. A nature values market, or nature credits, is the key element in achieving that goal. Landowners have many objectives, and through a market mechanism the provision of nature values could become a financially viable option alongside other ways of earning an income.

A message to policymakers: do not waste the opportunities!

The effort to develop a nature values market must cover every aspect connected with forests, including their everyday use. Forest owners must be involved at the various stages of the process.

Public authorities can create favourable conditions, but they must not act as market participants. Excessive regulation can disrupt the market and destroy its potential.

The nature values market is an additional instrument. If the government or another public authority imposes restrictions on the use of forests, this must be compensated from public funds.

The Brussels institutions appear to be in a hurry, but caution is needed – for example, with regard to ideas about merging the carbon market and the nature values market. So as not to burden the development of the market with complications, MTK supports developing the criteria for the nature values market and nature credits as a unit separate from the carbon market. Since carbon accumulation is a global process while nature credits are mainly local in character, the objectives of the carbon market and the nature values market must be set separately.

EU policymaking must take into account the unique features of each member state and every aspect connected with the multiple use of forests. National work on developing the nature market must be respected. Possible models for a nature values market must be applied across Europe in a way that takes national differences into account and encourages broad participation by forest owners.

According to rumours circulating in Brussels, only a few activities – such as protection, restoration and improved management – would be considered eligible for biodiversity credits. If the market does not recognise a broad range of different practices and measures, a considerable number of forest owners could be unable to take part, which would contradict the fact that sustainable forest management involves a wide range of measures that significantly improve biodiversity. The interests of forest owners must not be ignored.

The Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners in Finland is a leader in developing the nature values market

Creating the market with restrictive rules could jeopardise the development of the nature values market, and that should be avoided. Nature credits and the nature values market must be simple and based solely on market principles. MTK encourages forest owners to take part in trials and testing of the nature values market before that market or its methods are introduced. Ideally, the market would be available for wider use.

MTK is a leader in developing nature credits and the nature values market, and is ready to share its experience and best practices. The next version of MTK's nature values market (luontoarvot.fi) will be completed in 2025, and MTK is ready to offer it for use by other countries as well.

The nature values market must make room for a variety of products. A good example is Finland's ecological compensation model, which is useful for credits based on certificates issued by authorities. As demand is also growing for smaller models, these must be developed at the same time.

Next year looks set to be decisive in showing whether the European Commission is wise enough to place its trust in the nature values market and let it develop. If it believes that such a market can be created by means of legal acts, the Commission has made a serious mistake.

The author, Marko Mäki-Hakola, is Forestry Director at the Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners in Finland (MTK)