With Uldis Amerika talks Māris Liopa, director of the zemeunvalsts.lv portal for Latvia's forestry and related industries, and Pauls Rēvelis, editor of zemeunvalsts.lv.
Before we began this conversation, you mentioned an important and perennially topical subject – security. It's a subject many people talk about
Security isn't just the army, weapons, drones or border guards. It's a much broader concept. It's energy security, food security, economic resilience, critical infrastructure, and people's ability to live and work in Latvia. What matters especially is how people live near the border. We talk a lot about strengthening the border, but far less about how to make sure people in those regions actually want to stay, work and build a future there. If people leave, empty or sparsely populated territory doesn't become a guarantee of security. Given today's geopolitical situation, we need to look at the country's development through the lens of security. That means reassessing our priorities and understanding what Latvia needs to preserve and develop to remain resilient in the long term. A cycle has just come to a close with the change of government, and we can now take stock of the government led by Evika Siliņa. While that government was still in office, before its resignation, “Laflora” managed to build a wind farm reasonably quickly.
Briefly, how did that happen?
It happened because everyone involved was focused on getting results. On our side, we did all the necessary groundwork – prepared the documentation, carried out a risk assessment, sorted out the property and contractual issues, and secured financing. At the same time, there were people within state institutions who understood the project's importance and were ready to make decisions. I particularly want to highlight the involvement of the Ministry of Economics, because its officials focused on getting the project done rather than on why it couldn't be. Our experience proved that large infrastructure projects can be delivered in Latvia in a relatively short time, given professional cooperation and a shared understanding of the goal.
How would you assess the involvement of the Ministry of Agriculture?
Here I definitely want to give credit to specific people. Raivis Kronbergs, the former State Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture, was one of the first public administration representatives to start raising peat industry issues at European level, and he listened to the industry's arguments. The then Minister of Agriculture, Armands Krauze, was the first Latvian minister to put the peat issue on the agenda at the EU Council of Ministers. That matters, because for a long time the industry was discussed without the industry itself having a seat at the table. Dialogue is always better than assumptions.
To close out the question of successful cooperation – what's the difference between the concepts of “loss” and “investment”?
...
In my view, these two concepts are often confused in Latvia. When money is put into infrastructure, production or access to resources, it starts out as expenditure. The question is what that spending creates or delivers in future. If it results in new jobs, growing exports, rising tax revenue and economic activity, then it's an investment. It's a loss only if the money is spent and society gets nothing back in return. That's why any project should be judged by the added value it creates, not simply by the amount spent.
Why do you think people fail to grasp these concepts, or pretend not to?
I think Latvia has ended up in a situation where fear of making decisions has become one of the main obstacles to development. If an official feels that any decision could potentially create problems or draw criticism, it's far safer to decide nothing at all – and that's when the extra approvals start, the extra opinions, the extra requests for information. The result is that an investor is ready to invest, but the process grinds to a halt. Life is far more complicated than any piece of legislation, and it's impossible to set out every situation in advance. That's why we need professional people who are able to take responsibility and make decisions.
A little more on peat. There are climate targets, there's an accounting system, and there are various emissions calculations, where methodology matters a great deal. Emissions calculations often assume that all extracted peat is burned. In Latvia's case that doesn't reflect reality, because most peat is used in professional horticulture and forestry. We've been investing in scientific research and measurements for several years now, to get accurate data on emissions from peat extraction sites. Discussions need to be grounded in real measurements, not generalised assumptions. If we want to make the right decisions, we have to base them on science and data.
Let me come back to security – which region of Latvia has the most bogs? Latgale.
That's exactly why I believe economic development is one of the most important elements of security. If a region has jobs, businesses and investment, people will live there. If people live there, the region will be strong. I sometimes hear the argument that bogs are themselves a security asset, and I disagree. Modern warfare hasn't looked like it did a hundred years ago for a long time. The foundation of national security is people. If people have work, family and confidence in the future, they also have the motivation to defend their country.
How much peat could we sustainably extract in a normal situation?
Under normal market conditions, Latvia could sustainably extract around one and a half million tonnes of peat a year. The priority right now isn't to expand the extraction areas. The priority is to keep the ability to work in the existing areas and to have predictable regulation. The industry isn't asking for subsidies or special support mechanisms. What we need is stability, so that companies can plan investment, employment and exports for the long term. That's precisely why we've also been working on an industry sustainability memorandum, built on economic, environmental and social considerations alike.
You must have taken part in discussions and disputes about wind energy and wind turbines, and heard objections to them
Energy independence is one of the pillars of Latvia's security. Every megawatt-hour we can generate ourselves strengthens our country. We often hear: “I'm in favour of wind energy, just not near me.” Our approach was different. We chose to develop a wind farm on our own land and to see it as part of long-term development. At first we were thinking about a single turbine for the company's own needs; later we realised the potential was far greater. Today our wind farm is only the first step in a much broader development plan – a green industrial zone. I'm convinced that Latvia has to make smart use of its own resources, and that applies to land, to energy and to people alike. If we manage them as good stewards, both the regions and the country as a whole will benefit.
What do you see as the main precondition for Latvia's future development?
In my view it's very simple – people, land, and the ability to make decisions. We have the resources, we have enterprising people, and we have the opportunities. The question is whether we can make use of them. A country cannot become strong if it's afraid of development, or if it keeps restricting those who want to work and invest. If people have work, confidence in the future, and a sense that their contribution is needed, they will defend their family, their land and their country alike. That, in my view, is where real security begins.