EU LIFE Programme: the EU's dedicated environment and nature fund, 1992 to 2027
- The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
- Government and regulators European Commission (ex-post evaluation, 2024): LIFE 2014–2020 achieved most of its 2020 targets, improved the conservation status of 435 species on project-reported data, and delivered benefits more than 10-fold its costs for traditional projects; the performance indicators measure mainly outputs. European Commission
- Government and regulators European Court of Auditors (2009): Audited LIFE-Nature projects contributed to the conservation of targeted species and habitats, but with no ex-post follow-up the Commission had little information on effectiveness. European Court of Auditors
- Government and regulators European Court of Auditors (2013): The LIFE Environment component was not operating effectively because it was not sufficiently well designed and implemented. European Court of Auditors
- Government and regulators European Court of Auditors (2025): Strategic projects help implement member states' plans, but their impact is not entirely clear and monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation of their contribution. European Court of Auditors
- Researchers Hermoso et al. (2018): Poor relationship between conservation priorities across Natura 2000 and the way LIFE-Nature funds were distributed, 1992–2013. Journal of Applied Ecology
- Researchers Adamo et al. (2022): Animals received three times more LIFE funding than plants in 1992–2020; habitat-level expenditure was unrelated to conservation status. Biological Conservation
- Government and regulators European Commission (2024): Selection assesses innovation and replication potential; 47% of traditional projects went to two Member States, and indicative national allocations introduced in 2007 proved ineffective in correcting the imbalance. European Commission
- Government and regulators European Court of Auditors (2025): Strategic projects are not always aligned with member states' most important environmental issues. European Court of Auditors
LIFE, run by the European Commission since 1992 and implemented by its executive agency CINEA, has funded more than 6,500 environment, nature and climate projects; its 2021–2027 budget is EUR 5,432 million, including EUR 2,143 million for nature and biodiversity. The Commission's own evaluation reports targets largely met; the European Court of Auditors found in 2013 and 2025 that effectiveness and impact were limited or unclear, and peer-reviewed studies found nature spending poorly matched to conservation priorities.
Financial envelope in current prices in the Council position adopted in 2021, of which EUR 2,143 million for the Nature and Biodiversity sub-programme. CINEA and a Commission performance page give EUR 5.45 billion, the figure of the Commission's 2018 proposal; the European Court of Auditors gives 5.4 billion.
Status As of December 2025: LIFE 2021–2027 is running with a EUR 5,432 million envelope; the ECA reported in November 2025 that the impact of LIFE strategic projects is not entirely clear; the mid-term evaluation of LIFE 2021–2027 is not on record.
- Project beneficiaries (public bodies, NGOs, private entities) — Received LIFE grants; for 2014–2020, EUR 2.6 billion for 1,163 action grants; the Commission's indicators count more than 4,000 NGOs, over 6,000 private entities and about 11,500 public bodies involved; 79% of interviewed beneficiaries said they would not have found other funding European Commission
- Member State administrations — Strategic and integrated projects funded the implementation of national and regional plans: EUR 701 million to 70 projects in 2014–2020 and EUR 436 million to 25 projects by April 2025 European Court of Auditors
What happened
LIFE (L'Instrument Financier pour l'Environnement) is described by the European Commission as the only EU funding programme specifically dedicated to environment and climate action. It is managed by the Commission together with the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). CINEA's history page gives each funding period as stated: LIFE I (1992–1995) ECU 400 million and 731 projects; LIFE II (1996–1999) ECU 450 million and 865 projects; LIFE III (2000–2006) EUR 640 million and 1,157 projects; LIFE+ (2007–2013) EUR 2.14 billion and 1,403 projects; LIFE (2014–2020) EUR 3.40 billion; LIFE (2021–2027) EUR 5.45 billion. CINEA states that between 1992 and 2006 LIFE spent EUR 1.36 billion on 2,753 projects in 40 countries and territories, and that in the 1990s it helped develop inventories of potential Natura 2000 sites. CINEA's programme page counts over 6,500 projects.
For 2021–2027 the Council's first-reading position, approved by the European Parliament on 29 April 2021, set a financial envelope of EUR 5,432 million in current prices: EUR 3,488 million for Environment, of which EUR 2,143 million for the Nature and Biodiversity sub-programme and EUR 1,345 million for Circular Economy and Quality of Life, and EUR 1,944 million for Climate Action, split into EUR 947 million for climate mitigation and adaptation and EUR 997 million for the clean energy transition. At least 60% of Environment action-grant resources were to go to nature and biodiversity projects. The Commission had proposed EUR 5.45 billion; the Parliament's 2018 amendments sought EUR 7.27 billion in current prices, with EUR 2.82 billion for nature and biodiversity, in 2018 prices.
The Commission's ex-post evaluation of LIFE 2014–2020 (COM(2024) 359, 31 July 2024) states a budget of EUR 3.46 billion, 0.3% of the EU budget. LIFE financed 1,163 action grants with total project costs of EUR 4.8 billion, of which EUR 2.6 billion was provided by LIFE; 70 integrated projects received about EUR 700 million from LIFE and, according to the Commission, delivered an additional EUR 31.6 billion from other sources. On aggregated estimates from data reported by advanced and completed projects, the Commission says LIFE improved the conservation status of 435 species and co-financed the purchase of 3,127 km2 of protected areas for EUR 83 million. The evaluation's cut-off was June 2023, when 58% of projects were still ongoing, so its benefits cover about half of the projects. It found benefits exceeding costs more than 10-fold for traditional projects, that 47% of traditional projects went to two Member States, and that the programme's performance indicators measure mainly outputs and do not give a comprehensive view of success. The Commission's own report concluded that LIFE achieved most of its 2020 targets.
The European Court of Auditors (ECA) has audited LIFE several times. In 2009 it visited 35 LIFE-Nature projects in six Member States and found that they had contributed to the conservation of the targeted species and habitats, mainly in Natura 2000 sites, but that with no ex-post follow-up the Commission had little information on the effectiveness of the actions financed; LIFE-Nature had financed 434 projects for EUR 436 million in 2000–2006. In 2013 it found that the LIFE Environment component, which had provided EUR 1.3 billion to 1,730 projects between 1996 and 2012, was not operating effectively because it was not sufficiently well designed and implemented, and that indicative national allocations hampered the selection of the best projects. In November 2025 it audited 22 strategic projects in Spain, Poland and Finland: LIFE provided EUR 701 million to 70 such projects in 2014–2020 and allocated EUR 436 million to 25 more by April 2025. The Court found the projects help member states implement their plans, but that selection may not reflect member states' most important needs, that the arrangements for sustaining results are weak, and that monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation of the projects' contribution to EU environmental and climate objectives.
Two peer-reviewed studies examined where LIFE nature money went. Hermoso and colleagues (Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018), modelling LIFE effort from 1992 to 2013, found a poor relationship between conservation priorities across Natura 2000 sites and the way LIFE-Nature funds had been distributed. Adamo and colleagues (Biological Conservation, 2022) found that between 1992 and 2020 animal species received three times more LIFE funding than plants and that, at habitat level, expenditure was unrelated to the habitat's conservation status. A Commission working document of April 2023 records that LIFE contributed EUR 1.7 billion to Natura 2000 in 2014–2020, including EUR 1 billion from the EU. In December 2025 a Commission spokesperson told Euronews that objectives and actions financed by LIFE would continue to be funded in the next EU budget through other instruments; Euronews reported that the Commission had proposed merging LIFE into new funds. No independent measurement of the programme's overall effect on species or habitats is on record.
- 1992LIFE I launched (1992–1995): ECU 400 million, 731 projects
- 1996LIFE II (1996–1999): ECU 450 million, 865 projects
- 2000LIFE III (2000–2006): EUR 640 million, 1,157 projects; LIFE-Nature finances 434 projects for EUR 436 million
- 2007LIFE+ (2007–2013): EUR 2.14 billion, 1,403 projects
- 2009ECA Special Report 11/2009 on LIFE-Nature: audited projects contributed to conservation; Commission has little information on effectiveness (adopted 2 July)
- 2013ECA Special Report 15/2013: LIFE Environment component not operating effectively (adopted 6 November)
- 2014LIFE 2014–2020 begins (EUR 3.46 billion per the Commission's ex-post evaluation); integrated projects introduced
- 2018Hermoso et al. find a poor relationship between conservation priorities and LIFE-Nature fund distribution
- 2021LIFE 2021–2027 adopted: EUR 5,432 million, including EUR 2,143 million for Nature and Biodiversity (Parliament approval 29 April)
- 2022Adamo et al. find no relationship between LIFE habitat expenditure and habitat conservation status
- 2024Commission ex-post evaluation of LIFE 2014–2020 reports most targets achieved (31 July)
- 2025ECA Special Report 25/2025: impact of LIFE strategic projects not entirely clear (adopted 12 November; reported 12 December)
What was said
“the LIFE 'Environment' component was not operating effectively because it was not sufficiently well designed and implemented”
“Overall, the projects audited have contributed to the conservation of the targeted species and habitats, namely in the Natura 2000 sites”
“current monitoring approaches do not allow an adequate evaluation of the contribution made by LIFE strategic projects to the EU's environmental and climate objectives”
“Weaknesses remain in prioritising needs, monitoring progress, and sharing results.”
“The ex-post evaluation of LIFE 2014-2020 demonstrated that the Programme achieved most of its 2020 targets as set in the performance framework.”
“The objectives and actions previously financed by LIFE will continue to be funded”
“We found a poor relationship between the priorities identified here and the way funds had been distributed”
“At the habitat-level, we found no relationship between expenditure and conservation status of the habitat.”
Where accounts differ
Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.
LIFE 2014–2020 achieved most of its 2020 targets, improved the conservation status of 435 species on project-reported data, and delivered benefits more than 10-fold its costs for traditional projects; the performance indicators measure mainly outputs.
European CommissionAudited LIFE-Nature projects contributed to the conservation of targeted species and habitats, but with no ex-post follow-up the Commission had little information on effectiveness.
European Court of AuditorsThe LIFE Environment component was not operating effectively because it was not sufficiently well designed and implemented.
European Court of AuditorsStrategic projects help implement member states' plans, but their impact is not entirely clear and monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation of their contribution.
European Court of AuditorsPoor relationship between conservation priorities across Natura 2000 and the way LIFE-Nature funds were distributed, 1992–2013.
Journal of Applied EcologyAnimals received three times more LIFE funding than plants in 1992–2020; habitat-level expenditure was unrelated to conservation status.
Biological ConservationSelection assesses innovation and replication potential; 47% of traditional projects went to two Member States, and indicative national allocations introduced in 2007 proved ineffective in correcting the imbalance.
European CommissionStrategic projects are not always aligned with member states' most important environmental issues.
European Court of AuditorsHow it looked
Shown
- LIFE described as "the only EU funding programme specifically dedicated to environment and climate action" with "a strong reputation over its more than 30 years of existence".European Commission, ex-post evaluation COM(2024) 359 · European Commission
- LIFE described as having improved the conservation status of 435 species and co-financed the purchase of 3,127 km2 of protected areas, on aggregated estimates from project-reported data.European Commission, ex-post evaluation COM(2024) 359 · European Commission
- LIFE described as having "over 6,500 projects" making a difference at local level.
Recorded
- ECA (2009): with no ex-post follow-up procedure for assessing the effectiveness of the actions financed, "the Commission has little information in this respect".
- ECA (2013): the Environment component was not operating effectively; indicative national allocations hampered the selection of the best projects.
- ECA (2025): monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation of the contribution made by LIFE strategic projects; selection may not take account of member states' most important needs.
- Commission (2024): the 2014–2020 performance indicators "do not allow to provide a comprehensive view of the Programme's success"; the 435-species figure is an aggregate of data reported by projects; 58% of projects were still ongoing at the June 2023 cut-off.
- Hermoso et al. (2018): poor relationship between Natura 2000 conservation priorities and the distribution of LIFE-Nature funds, 1992–2013.
- Adamo et al. (2022): animal species received three times more LIFE funding than plants (1992–2020); no relationship between habitat expenditure and habitat conservation status.
In nature's name
Promised
- “contribute to the shift towards a resource-efficient, low-carbon and climate- resilient economy, to the protection and improvement of the quality of the environment and to halting and reversing biodiversity loss, including the support of the Natura 2000 network and tackling the degradation of ecosystems” — Regulation (EU) No 1293/2013, Article 3(1), as quoted by the European Commission (2013) European Commission
- “a platform for the exchange of best practice among Member States and as a catalyst for more effective investments” — Regulation (EU) No 1293/2013, recital 3, as quoted by the European Commission (2013) European Commission
Money moved in nature's name
| What | Kind | Amount | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| LIFE budget 2021–2027 (financial envelope, current prices) European Union (European Commission, CINEA) European Parliament, Legislative Observatory | Budget | €5.4bn | 2021–2027 |
| Nature and Biodiversity sub-programme, 2021–2027 European Union European Parliament, Legislative Observatory | Budget | €2.1bn | 2021–2027 |
| LIFE budget 2014–2020 European Union European Commission | Budget | €3.5bn | 2014–2020 |
| LIFE contribution to 1,163 action grants, 2014–2020 European Union European Commission | Paid out | €2.6bn | 2014–2020 |
| LIFE+ budget 2007–2013 European Union European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) | Budget | €2.1bn | 2007–2013 |
| LIFE III budget 2000–2006 European Union European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) | Budget | €640m | 2000–2006 |
| LIFE II budget 1996–1999 European Union European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) | Budget | 450m ECU | 1996–1999 |
| LIFE I budget 1992–1995 European Communities European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) | Budget | 400m ECU | 1992–1995 |
| LIFE spending on 2,753 projects, 1992–2006 European Union European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) | Spent | €1.4bn | 1992–2006 |
| LIFE-Nature financing of 434 projects, 2000–2006 European Union European Court of Auditors | Paid out | €436m | 2000–2006 |
| LIFE strategic (integrated) projects, 70 projects European Union European Court of Auditors | Paid out | €701m | 2014–2020 |
| LIFE strategic projects, 25 projects allocated as of April 2025 European Union European Court of Auditors | Budget | €436m | 2021–2025 |
| Land purchase of 3,127 km2 of protected areas co-financed through LIFE projects European Union and beneficiaries European Commission | Spent | €83m | 2014–2020 |
| LIFE funding for Natura 2000, 2014–2020 (EU share) European Union European Commission | Spent | €1bn | 2014–2020 |
What was measured
No independent measurement of LIFE's overall effect on species or habitats is on record. The Commission's figures (435 species with improved status, 3,127 km2 purchased) are its own aggregates of data reported by projects, and its evaluation covered about half of the 2014–2020 projects. The European Court of Auditors found in 2009 that audited LIFE-Nature projects contributed to the conservation of targeted species and habitats but that the Commission had little information on effectiveness, and in 2025 that monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation. Peer-reviewed studies examined where the money went, not what it achieved.
Operation Ongoing · LIFE 2021–2027 is running. Euronews reported in December 2025 that the Commission had proposed merging LIFE into new funds in the next multiannual budget; a Commission spokesperson said its objectives would continue to be funded. Euronews
Findings on record
- Official audit European Court of Auditors (2009-07-02) · Special Report No 11/2009: “the projects audited have contributed to the conservation of the targeted species and habitats, namely in the Natura 2000 sites” European Court of Auditors
- Official audit European Court of Auditors (2013-11-06) · Special Report No 15/2013: “the LIFE 'Environment' component was not operating effectively because it was not sufficiently well designed and implemented” European Court of Auditors
- Official audit European Court of Auditors (2025-11-12) · Special Report 25/2025: “current monitoring approaches do not allow an adequate evaluation of the contribution made by LIFE strategic projects to the EU's environmental and climate objectives” European Court of Auditors
- Peer-reviewed study Hermoso, Villero, Clavero and Brotons, Journal of Applied Ecology (2018) · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13116: “We found a poor relationship between the priorities identified here and the way funds had been distributed” Journal of Applied Ecology
- Peer-reviewed study Adamo et al., Biological Conservation (2022-08) · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109636: “At the habitat-level, we found no relationship between expenditure and conservation status of the habitat.” Biological Conservation
- Own admission European Commission (2024-07-31) · COM(2024) 359 final: “do not allow to provide a comprehensive view of the Programme's success” European Commission
Who gained
Reached nature or the ground
Gained elsewhere
Responses on record
- European Commission (31 July 2024; 12 December 2025): Its ex-post evaluation says LIFE achieved most of its 2020 targets, delivered benefits exceeding costs more than 10-fold, and that weaknesses in the indicators have been addressed for 2021–2027. A spokesperson said in December 2025 that the objectives and actions financed by LIFE will continue to be funded through other instruments in the next budget. · European Commission
- CINEA: No statement of its own on the audit findings is recorded in the sources reviewed.
In court and with insurers
Lawsuits and rulings
Insurers
What nature saw
Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.
What we don't know
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
- Disputed Whether LIFE has been effective for nature and the environment
- Disputed Whether LIFE nature money goes where conservation needs are greatest
Record
- Not measured Not measured: the overall effect of LIFE on the conservation status of species and habitats in the EU. The Commission's figure of 435 species improved aggregates data reported by projects; ECA found in 2009 that the Commission had little information on effectiveness and in 2025 that monitoring does not allow an adequate evaluation.
- None on record None on record: the mid-term evaluation of LIFE 2021–2027, which the Commission must carry out no later than 42 months after the start of implementation.
- Unclear None on record: a single total of LIFE spending on nature and biodiversity across all funding periods since 1992.
- Unclear Unclear: the 2021–2027 budget is given as EUR 5,432 million (Council position adopted in 2021), EUR 5.45 billion (CINEA and a Commission performance page, the figure of the 2018 proposal) and 5.4 billion (ECA, 2025). The 2014–2020 budget is given as EUR 3.40 billion (CINEA), EUR 3.46 billion (Commission, 2024) and 3.5 billion (ECA, 2025).
- Unclear Unclear: the start year. CINEA, the Commission and the ECA in 2009 and 2025 give 1992; an ECA report of 2017 describes LIFE as dating back to 1993.
Did the harm stop?
Not applicable as a harm case. The sources reviewed record no measured harm to nature caused by LIFE; they question how far its effects on nature are known.
Who paid?
The EU budget funds LIFE; beneficiaries co-finance projects (for 2014–2020 traditional projects, EUR 1.9 billion from LIFE and EUR 1.6 billion from beneficiaries, per the Commission).
Sources
Government and regulators
- 30 years of bringing green ideas to LIFE (programme history and timeline)European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) ·
- LIFE Programme (programme page)European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) ·
- Programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE) 2021–2027: Council position at first reading (procedure 2018/0209(COD)), summaryEuropean Parliament, Legislative Observatory · 2021-03-19
- Programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE) 2021–2027: Parliament amendments at first reading, summaryEuropean Parliament, Legislative Observatory · 2018-12-11
- Programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE) 2021–2027: Parliament approval of the Council position, summaryEuropean Parliament, Legislative Observatory · 2021-04-29
- LIFE — monitoring and evaluation (programme performance statement)European Commission ·
- Special Report No 11/2009: The sustainability and the Commission's management of the LIFE-Nature projectsEuropean Court of Auditors · 2009-07-02
- Special Report No 15/2013: Has the Environment component of the LIFE programme been effective?European Court of Auditors · 2013-11-06
- Special report 25/2025: LIFE strategic projects — Bridge the gap between strategy and implementation, but impact not entirely clearEuropean Court of Auditors · 2025-11-12
- Special Report No 1/2017: More efforts needed to implement the Natura 2000 network to its full potentialEuropean Court of Auditors · 2017-01-11
Press and investigations
Researchers
Connected cases
- Natura 2000: the EU network of protected sites, its financing gap and the state of protected nature European Union · 1992–2027 Related matter
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Oversees the nature directives and Natura 2000; estimated financing needs; brought C-441/17
- European Court of Auditors (Public authority) — here: Audited LIFE-Nature (2009), the Environment component (2013) and strategic projects (2025); there: Audited Natura 2000 (2017) and farmland biodiversity spending (2020)
- EU LIFE funding for loggerhead conservation, 2002-2029 European Union · 2002–2029 Related matter
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Funder through the LIFE programme (CINEA)
- Bottom trawling in European marine protected areas European Union · 2017–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Proposed the non-binding phase-out target
- European Parliament (Public authority) — here: Co-legislator; approved LIFE 2021–2027 on 29 April 2021; there: Resolution against forced bans
- EU budget 2014–2020: climate spending reported by the Commission and the European Court of Auditors' finding European Union · 2014–2022
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Reported the climate spending figure of €216 billion
- European Court of Auditors (Public authority) — here: Audited LIFE-Nature (2009), the Environment component (2013) and strategic projects (2025); there: Auditor; author of Special Report 09/2022
- EU Common Agricultural Policy: climate and farmland biodiversity spending audited by the European Court of Auditors European Union · 2014–2021
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Tracked CAP climate and biodiversity spending; its tracking was found unreliable on biodiversity
- European Court of Auditors (Public authority) — here: Audited LIFE-Nature (2009), the Environment component (2013) and strategic projects (2025); there: Auditor; author of Special Reports 13/2020 and 16/2021
- EU Deforestation Regulation delays and trade pressure European Union · 2022
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Proposer of simplification review
- European Parliament (Public authority) — here: Co-legislator; approved LIFE 2021–2027 on 29 April 2021; there: Voted both postponements
- Used cooking oil and POME biofuel certification: fraud allegations (ISCC, EU/UK) European Union · 2016–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Regulator; anti-dumping duties; recognition of ISCC
- European Court of Auditors (Public authority) — here: Audited LIFE-Nature (2009), the Environment component (2013) and strategic projects (2025); there: Auditor; 2016 special report on voluntary schemes
- VAT carousel fraud in EU emissions allowance trading (2008–2010) European Union · 2008–2016
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Suspended spot transfers on 19 January 2011 after registry thefts
- European Court of Auditors (Public authority) — here: Audited LIFE-Nature (2009), the Environment component (2013) and strategic projects (2025); there: Special Report 06/2015 on VAT fraud risk in the market
- 62% of UK paraquat exports since 2015 went to poorer countries, analysis finds United Kingdom · 2015–2024
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Institution whose paraquat approval the EU court annulled
- AdBlue cartel (Daimler, BMW, VW) Germany · 2009–2014
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Competition authority that issued the decision
- Bou Craa phosphate mine and Morocco green hydrogen in Western Sahara Western Sahara (controlled in large part by Morocco) · 1975–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Negotiated the EU-Morocco arrangements
- End-of-life vehicle recycling cartel (EU carmakers, ACEA) European Union · 2002–2017
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Regulator
- EU banned-pesticide exports European Union · 2018–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Made the 2020 pledge; reported to have withdrawn it in 2026
- EU bans three neonicotinoid pesticides outdoors in 2018; Turkey follows in part European Union · 2018
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: adopted the outdoor ban
- EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism burden on Turkish exporters Turkey · 2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Regulator of CBAM
- EU taxonomy hydropower exemption and California large hydro exclusion European Union / United States · 2002–2021
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Author of the taxonomy rule
- European Parliament votes to downgrade wolf protection European Union · 2025
- European Parliament (Public authority) — here: Co-legislator; approved LIFE 2021–2027 on 29 April 2021; there: Voted to downgrade the wolf's protection status
- Germany agreed €2.6bn and €1.75bn coal exit payments to RWE and LEAG Germany · 2019–2023
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: approved the RWE payment
- Great Green Wall: USD 19bn tracked, USD 2.5bn disbursed by March 2023, and a restored area reported at between 1.66 and almost 18 million hectares Sahel (11 countries) · 2007–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Donor; land restoration pillar USD 208 million
- HFC-23 and SF6 Joint Implementation projects at KCKK Polymer and HaloPolymer Perm Russia · 2008–2015
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Regulation 550/2011 banning HFC-23 credits from 2013
- Kerch Strait storm, November 2007: Volgoneft 139 fuel-oil spill and sulphur-ship sinkings Russia · 2007–2018
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Post-disaster needs assessment with UNEP
- Khimki forest and the M11 Moscow–St Petersburg toll motorway (km 15–58) Russia · 2007–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Letter to an MEP on EIB and EBRD financing conditions
- Kyparissia Bay (Thines Kyparissias), Greece: construction, roads and beach use at a loggerhead nesting site, CJEU C-504/14 (2016) Greece · 2010–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Brought the infringement action in C-504/14
- Laganas Bay, Zakynthos, Greece: National Marine Park, Bern file 1986/8 and CJEU C-103/00 (2002) Greece · 1986–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Brought the infringement action in C-103/00; inspected the beaches in 1998 and 1999
- Limni Bay / Polis-Gialia golf and villa resort, Cyprus: infringement procedure closed (2019), land sold (2025) Cyprus · 1995–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Reasoned opinion (April 2015); closed the infringement procedure (24 January 2019)
- Lliuya v RWE Peru · 2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Approved the German compensation payment to RWE (13 December 2023)
- Mauritania fishmeal industry, sardinella stocks and foreign fishing agreements Mauritania · 2008–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Negotiator and evaluator of the SFPA; publishes the protocol terms
- Register of Damage for Ukraine, the Claims Commission convention and the money meant to pay claims Ukraine · 2024–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Reported the EUR 1.4 billion transfer
- Russian Joint Implementation credits under the Kyoto Protocol, 2009–2012 Russia · 2009–2015
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Regulation 550/2011; EU ETS credit data
- Spain: environmental liability financial guarantee (EU Directive Art. 14) Spain · 2004
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Evaluated the directive and reported on mandatory financial security
- Thames Tideway Tunnel, London: a 25 km sewer tunnel paid for through customer bills United Kingdom · 2012–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Brought the 2012 case against the United Kingdom
- Ukraine's ban on raw-log exports and the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement arbitration, 2015–2026 Ukraine · 2015–2026
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Brought the dispute and published the memo
- Ukraine's Joint Implementation credits and Kyoto unit sales to Japan and Spain, 2008–2021 Ukraine · 2008–2021
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Set rules on use of international credits
- Zakynthos landfill inside the National Marine Park, Greece: CJEU C-600/12 (2014) and penalty judgment C-368/24 (2025) Greece · 1999–2025
- European Commission (Public authority) — here: Manages LIFE in direct management; author of the 2024 ex-post evaluation; there: Brought the actions in C-600/12 and C-368/24