Clarification on the interpretation of Directive 92/43/EEC (Habitats Directive), in particular Articles 12 and 16 thereof, in light of Communication C(2021)7301

Priority question for written answer P-001149/2026
to the Commission
Rule 144
Stefan Köhler (PPE)

In Germany, construction projects are often delayed due to confusion relating to species protection. A state-managed species protection fund - capable of financing, at federal state level, population-management measures such as biotope networks, strategic monitoring or targeted habitat improvements at landscape level - would improve the level of environmental protection through more targeted and strategic measures and could speed up permitting procedures.

• 1.Does the Commission take the view that Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive does not preclude national legislation that allows compensatory measures that are carried out at a different time but that have the same ecological outcome?
• 2.Does the Commission take the view that a significant delay in a project is in itself capable of eliminating the reasonableness of an advance compensatory measure (CEF) as a satisfactory alternative within the meaning of Article 16(1) of the Habitats Directive?
• 3.Does the Commission take the view that a state-managed species protection fund - with funds earmarked for specific purposes and subject to continuous monitoring - can effectively prevent a deterioration in the conservation status of populations within the meaning of Article 16(1) of the Habitats Directive?

Supporter[1]

Submitted: 18.3.2026

• [1] This question is supported by a Member other than the author: Christine Schneider (PPE).