"Measures should fit into everyday business operations"

Farmers face the challenge of working as economically and efficiently as possible. This is the only way to achieve the necessary increases in production to feed a growing world population. At the same time, climate change and the loss of biodiversity require producers to protect natural resources as best they can. To ensure that environmental services from agriculture are effective and reliable, the EU Commission plans to establish a framework for investment in the protection of natural resources with so-called Nature Credits. Dr Elke Plaas, a researcher at the Thünen Institute of Farm Economics in Braunschweig, gives her assessment of this concept in an interview. 

DLG: Under what conditions can nature credits help to put a fair value on the environmental services provided by farmers?

Dr Elke Plaas: In order to close the financing gap in environmental protection, the European Union wants to create a voluntary market for private investors. In July 2025, the so-called "Roadmap towards Nature Credits" was presented. This creates a strategic framework for investments in biodiversity and ecosystem services. The aim is to permanently supplement government funding for environmental protection. Halting the decline in biodiversity requires high levels of investment. A functioning market for nature credits would be one possible way of creating additional incentives for private investors to directly remunerate environmental services on agricultural production land.

Can this work purely on market economy principles, or do we need regulation after all?

At present, the legal framework for nature credits is still in the preparatory and discussion phase, and there is no concrete legislation as yet. Without clear rules and standards, there is a risk of greenwashing. Nature credits should therefore set the framework for a market, not replace a market. The regulation is the important foundation for establishing measurement criteria and standards according to which action can be taken.

Which instruments are preferable for rewarding environmental services provided by farmers: nature credits, as proposed by the EU, or private sector programmes run by agricultural companies?

There are many proven and effective measures for increasing biodiversity on agricultural land. The biggest hurdle is then the financial viability of long-term implementation. The EU system for nature credits is not designed to compete directly with existing or future private providers. Instead, it is seen as a supportive framework that gives private actors the opportunity to participate and build the system.

What requirements must Nature Credits meet in order to be accepted by both the economy and agricultural practice – and be more effective than support measures in achieving their goals?

Here, I would first focus on the measures themselves. The measures should fit into everyday business operations and be plannable in the long term. Financially, the compensation must be appropriate and it must be ensured that the measures chosen actually contribute to biodiversity. From the perspective of investors from the business community, it must be ensured that the measures are sustained in the long term and that they are actually effective, i.e. that they are also "safe" as an investment. 

Which environmental achievements should be eligible for Nature Credits – so that the concept of sustainable productivity growth, i.e. yield growth while conserving resources, can be successfully implemented?

In the concept of sustainable productivity growth presented by the DLG, I see the possibility of also taking into account overall resource consumption and potential resource conservation. If we want to define and measure a comprehensive productivity measure for agricultural production and the associated resource consumption, this seems to be a very complex and costly undertaking from today's perspective. Numerous studies show how complicated it is to evaluate ecosystem services. Therefore, this challenge must be addressed first before we move on to the concrete design of nature credits. But in principle, nature credits can certainly contribute to evaluating environmental services, as the DLG also describes in its concept of sustainable productivity enhancement.

Can nature credits achieve the same status as CO2 certificates?

The Commission intends to base this concept on the voluntary carbon market model. Here, we can learn from the initial weaknesses of the voluntary carbon market and avoid repeating mistakes. The most important prerequisite is to gain the acceptance of investors and buyers, because without stable demand, the concept will remain ineffective.