Although NBS’s direct climate impact—generally measured at a few hundred Mt CO₂e sequestration annually—lags behind the drastic cuts achieved by renewable energy expansion and industrial decarbonization, they are indispensable for offsetting residual emissions and ensuring long-term climate resilience.
Spanning multiple climatic and ecological zones, the EU is home to various ecosystems—from alpine and boreal forests to Mediterranean wetlands, peatlands, grasslands, coastal zones, and urban green spaces. Yet, despite a rich diversity of landscapes, the high population density across much of the EU are amplifying the anthropogenic pressures of urbanization, industrialization, agricultural expansion, which in conjunction with the increasing impact of climate change are undermining their integrity, their resilience and natural functions and the vital services they provide to human society.
In EU policy, nature-based solutions (NBS) are seen as a suite of measures designed to enable the healthy functioning of natural and human-managed ecosystems. These solutions provide systemic responses to complex challenges like climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, disaster risk, and urbanization while also delivering economic and social co-benefits. The rich diversity of ecological zones across the block provides a foundation for tailoring nature-based solutions to specific climate zones, ecological functions, and land-use needs.
- Forest restoration, peatland rewetting, agrological regeneration, and agroforestry are well-suited to northern and central regions.
- Coastal and wetland restoration is key for southern and western Member States.
- Urban green infrastructure has strong potential across densely populated areas.
Over the past decade, the European Union has increasingly integrated NBS into its climate policies. NBS plays a critical role in mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, enhancing biodiversity, boosting urban resilience, and providing important ecosystem services. Across all EU countries, various NBS have been implemented through national programs and EU-wide initiatives like the European Green Deal, the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
This brief report reviews the major NBS types deployed in the EU: afforestation and reforestation, wetland and peatland restoration, urban green infrastructure, and coastal ecosystem protection, and examines their climate impact relative to other key mitigation measures.
Afforestation and Reforestation
Afforestation (planting trees on lands not previously forested) and reforestation (regenerating lost forests) have been a cornerstone of EU climate action. In recent years, the EU introduced bold objectives such as the “3 Billion Trees by 2030” pledge[1], calling for planting billions of additional trees provided that ecological criteria are met.
Between 2010 and 2022, Europe’s forest area expanded by approximately 2.6 million hectares—a modest yet significant 1.7% increase—bringing the total EU forest cover to about 160 million hectares (roughly 39% of total land area). This growth has primarily resulted from planned afforestation projects and natural reforestation on abandoned or marginal agricultural land.
Forests are recognized as one of the most important carbon sinks, and expanded forest cover is essential to long-term climate neutrality. The EU’s ambitious tree planting goals will progressively enhance the carbon sink. In 2022, the land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) sector sequestered 236 million tonnes CO₂-equivalent (MtCO₂e), offsetting about 7% of total EU GHG emissions[2]. While afforestation and reforestation add incremental sequestration as new trees grow, these contributions are gradual. However, Europe’s forests’ overall carbon removal capacity is under pressure from aging stands and increased harvesting.
Wetland and Peatland Restoration
Wetlands—and particularly peatlands—are another critical focus of EU NBS. Peatlands store vast quantities of carbon in their waterlogged soils. When these lands are drained (typically for agriculture or forestry), they become significant sources of carbon emissions. Historically, a large share of Europe’s peatlands had been degraded. As of 2020, only 10% of EU peatlands were in good (natural) condition, and over 50% no longer accumulate peat (i.e., no longer capture carbon).[3]
The EU and several member states have significantly ramped up efforts to restore peatland ecosystems. Projects like the LIFE Peat Restore initiative have rewet thousands of hectares of degraded peatlands. At the same time, national strategies in countries like Germany, Denmark, Ireland, and Finland focus on re-establishing functional peatland ecosystems. A key part of the long-term strategy is the EU’s recently adopted Nature Restoration Law, which sets binding targets—for example, aiming to rewet 30% of drained peatlands under agricultural use by 2030 and increasing this to 50% by 2050.
Restoring wetlands and peatlands delivers two principal climate benefits. First, rewetting prevents ongoing CO₂ emissions that occur when peat is oxidized. Estimates indicate that drained peatlands in the EU currently emit around 230 MtCO₂e annually. Second, as peatlands recover, they can resume accumulating carbon, thereby becoming active carbon sinks over time. Although the scale of restored area remains modest compared to forests, the immediate benefit of avoided emissions is substantial. Some projections suggest that achieving full restoration of degraded peatlands could prevent tens to hundreds of MtCO₂e per year from being released. Robust monitoring—integrated into national GHG inventories—ensures that the effectiveness of these measures is tracked and can inform further policy action.
Urban Green Infrastructure
European cities are at the forefront of integrating green infrastructure, such as urban forests, parks, green roofs, and restored waterways, into their climate and resilience strategies. Recent surveys reveal that more than 90% of European urban climate action plans include NBS measures. These initiatives often aim to address urban heat island effects, improve air quality, manage stormwater, and enhance overall urban livability, with climate mitigation as a co-benefit.
Cities such as Paris, Madrid, Milan, Copenhagen, and Berlin have undertaken ambitious tree planting and park expansion projects. Urban NBS have often transformed vacant lots and degraded urban spaces into green corridors, with funding and technical support provided by EU research programs (e.g., projects under Horizon 2020) and urban development funds from the EU cohesion policy.
While the carbon sequestration potential of urban trees and green spaces is typically lower per hectare than that of mature forests, their cumulative benefits in densely populated areas are significant. Urban green infrastructure reduces the energy needed to cool buildings and improves public health, indirectly reducing emissions. Although urban NBS alone might account for only a few Mt CO₂e per year, it is vital for integrating climate, social, and environmental benefits into densely populated settings.
Coastal Ecosystem Protection
Coastal ecosystems such as tidal salt marshes, seagrass meadows, and even mangroves (in Europe’s outermost regions) are recognized for their “blue carbon” potential—the capacity to sequester and store carbon efficiently in waterlogged sediments. In the EU, initiatives have been launched to protect and restore such coastal habitats, particularly in regions like the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, and France. These projects range from restoring tidal marshes to preventing further degradation of existing coastal wetlands.
Although coastal habitats’ total area is modest compared to terrestrial ecosystems, their high carbon density means that even small-scale restoration projects can significantly reduce emissions. Furthermore, healthy coastal ecosystems contribute to flood protection, shoreline stabilization, and biodiversity conservation.
Coastal restoration projects prevent emissions by ensuring these high-carbon systems are not converted into degraded lands. Although current blue carbon initiatives account for a relatively small fraction of the total EU carbon sink, their strategic role is crucial. They safeguard long-term carbon storage and protect communities from the adverse effects of coastal erosion and extreme weather events.
NBS Versus Other Emission-Reduction Approaches
Renewable energy and industrial decarbonization: The EU’s primary emission reduction efforts have centered on decarbonizing the energy sector. Over the past decade, the EU has aggressively expanded renewable energy (wind, solar, etc.), leading to significant drops in emissions from the power sector. Between 1990 and 2019, the EU’s power sector’s CO₂ emissions fell by ~44% in the EU,[4] primarily due to phasing out coal and scaling up renewables. In just the five years between 2015 and 2020 alone, Europe’s electricity saw a 29% reduction in carbon intensity, thanks to renewables growth[5]. In 2023 alone, as high carbon prices and cheap renewables displaced fossil generation, the energy supply sector saw an unprecedented 19% year-on-year emissions reduction[6].
By contrast, NBS works on longer timescales and so has achieved only incremental gains in carbon removal compared to the efforts achieved by energy decarbonization. For instance, even a healthy LULUCF sink of ~236 MtCO₂/yr[7] is significant, but it still pales in comparison to the annual emission reductions driven by energy decarbonisation.
Industrial decarbonisation and other tech approaches: The EU is also pursuing measures like improving energy efficiency, electrifying transport, developing green hydrogen for industry, and innovating low-carbon processes for cement and steel. These efforts are at varying stages. Industry (outside power) and transport have been slower to cut emissions – e.g., industry emissions only modestly declined (~9% from 1990 to 2019) and actually needed a push from the ETS and technology funds. By 2023, there was a notable 6% drop in industrial emissions due to efficiency and lower output.[8] Compared to NBS: a single new technology in industry (say, one green steel plant) might cut a few Mt of CO₂ per year, which is comparable to, for instance, the effect of restoring a few hundred thousand hectares of peatland. However, scaling industry solutions can ultimately remove hundreds of Mt of emissions (as heavy industry and transport currently emit billions). NBS have a scaling limit, constrained by land availability and ecological limits. Europe cannot simply plant forests indefinitely or turn all farms into wetlands without trade-offs (food production, land use conflicts). Thus, industrial and energy solutions will carry the bulk of reaching the 55% emissions reduction by 2030. NBS are complementary, covering perhaps an extra few percentage points of reduction or offset.
Regarding effectiveness, NBS offers multi-benefit solutions that are sometimes less predictable or durable than engineered solutions. A wind farm will avoid carbon emissions as long as it operates, whereas a forest can sequester carbon for decades. Still, it could later lose it in a wildfire or pest outbreak (a concern as Europe sees more climate-induced forest disturbances[9]. Maintaining NBS benefits requires ongoing stewardship – ensuring planted trees survive to maturity, that wildfires are contained, and that peatlands are wet. In contrast, the effect of an installed solar panel or a carbon tax is more straightforward to manage, and avoided emissions are harder to reverse.
On the other hand, while technological and regulatory initiatives have achieved rapid and verifiable emission reductions, they cannot remove historical CO₂ from the atmosphere at scale. For removals, NBS fill this gap by actively sequestering carbon, although their potential remains limited by factors such as land availability and ecosystem resilience. Additionally, NBS can provide multiple complementary benefits: improving biodiversity and climate resilience, and it often has greater levels of local public support (people tend to favour tree planting and wetland restoration over a new wind farm in their communities). NBS also addresses emissions from sectors like agriculture, where technology alone cannot easily eliminate all emissions (livestock, soil emissions, etc., which must be balanced by soil carbon sequestration or agroforestry).
The EU’s climate strategy increasingly recognises the need to integrate nature-based measures into the broader portfolio. The updated LULUCF regulations aim to bolster the overall carbon sink, and the new Nature Restoration Law is set to create measurable, legally binding restoration targets. Together, these efforts ensure that NBS, while currently contributing a smaller fraction of emission reductions, play a critical role in reaching net-zero targets in the long term.
NBS in the EU have evolved from localised projects into a mainstream component of the Union’s climate policy over the past decade. From reforesting lands and rewetting peatlands to greening urban areas and protecting vital coastal habitats, we contribute to a net carbon sink while providing extensive co-benefits. Although the direct climate impact of NBS—generally measured at a few hundred Mt CO₂e sequestration annually—lags behind the drastic cuts achieved by renewable energy expansion and industrial decarbonization, they are indispensable for offsetting residual emissions and ensuring long-term climate resilience.
Looking forward, the scaling up of NBS through legally binding targets, robust monitoring, and integrated policy frameworks (as seen in the Nature Restoration Law and the 3 Billion Trees pledge) is expected to enhance their role within the EU’s climate portfolio. While challenges remain—including land-use trade-offs, slower accumulation of carbon, and ecosystem management—the ongoing integration of NBS alongside technology-based measures forms a holistic strategy essential for achieving the EU’s ambitious net-zero goals by 2050.
This Post was submitted by Climate Scorecard EU Manager George Scott.
[1] Under the European Green Deal, the EU Biodiversity Strategy commits to plant at least 3 billion additional trees in the EU by 2030
[2] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-land#:~:text=The%20land%20use%2C%20land%20use,2018
[3] https://www.eurosite.org/peatlands-and-the-path-to-climate-neutrality/#:~:text=the%20EU
[4] https://climateanalytics.org/publications/decarbonisation-pathways-for-the-eu-power-sector#:~:text=Decarbonisation%20pathways%20for%20the%20EU,current%20context%20and%20opportunities
[5] https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/eu-power-sector-in-2020/#:~:text=EU%20Power%20Sector%20in%202020,2015%20to%20226%20grams
[6] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/total-greenhouse-gas-emission-trends#:~:text=Focusing%20on%20sectoral%20developments%20in,in%20specific%20sectors%20in%20Europe
[7] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-land#:~:text=The%20land%20use%2C%20land%20use,2018
[8] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/total-greenhouse-gas-emission-trends#:~:text=Focusing%20on%20sectoral%20developments%20in,in%20specific%20sectors%20in%20Europe
[9] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-land#:~:text=Natural%20disturbances%20%28e,wetter%20and%20colder%20parts%20of