```html Coalition: Biodiversity Researchers Fear for Objective Environmental Policy ```

The COP16 ended relatively chaotically in Cali, Colombia last fall without any tangible results. Four months later, representatives from around 200 countries are now making a new attempt in Italy's capital. Politically, it has also become extremely tense in Austria around the EU's "Renaturation Law." The final approval by the outgoing Climate Protection Minister Leonore Gewessler (Green Party) was crucial for the narrow approval of the proposal to protect biodiversity - and subsequently led to the final atmospheric tipping point of the also outgoing turquoise-green federal government.

If in the future, the government, expected to be formed by ÖVP, SPÖ, and NEOS, transfers the competence for environmental, climate, and nature conservation agendas to the Ministry of Agriculture, as many observers expect, it would bring many question marks. It is clear that we are dealing with a globally worsening climate and biodiversity crisis that has reached an unprecedented scale and foreseeably brings massive negative consequences for society.

With the consolidation of responsibilities for climate, nature conservation, and infrastructure in a green-led ministry at the start of the turquoise-green coalition, the area has undoubtedly experienced an "upgrade," according to the members of the leadership team of the Biodiversity Council. After all, a biodiversity task force was established, a - albeit underfunded according to the council - biodiversity fund was created, and not least the renaturation law was initiated. However, in the " Barometer of Biodiversity Policy in Austria " created by the council since 2019, most of the core demands of the experts still appear in red - meaning not implemented - even in the newly presented version this week.

Whether a future Minister of Agriculture, most likely coming from the ranks of the ÖVP and also responsible for environmental protection and related areas, can succeed in turning essential points green, was not evaluated by political scientist Alice Vadrot, botanist Irmgard Greilhuber (both from the University of Vienna), Andreas Tribsch, botanist from the University of Salzburg, and ecologist Johannes Rüdisser from the University of Innsbruck. However, they reminded that a minister should strive to act as a mediator.

If a department head "does not primarily see himself as an advocate for agriculture," there remains hope that species collaboration on issues such as protection or curbing the dangerously advancing soil sealing can continue, said Rüdisser. The coordinator of the Biodiversity Council, Yvona Asbäck, insisted that initiated measures should continue under new political responsibilities, the often poorly functioning cooperation between the federal government, states, and municipalities should be improved, a genuine, scientifically-strategically planned and significantly expanded network of protected areas should be promoted, or international initiatives, such as the renaturation law unpopular with the ÖVP, should be brought to life domestically.

Overall, there is still “little consensus between nature conservation and agriculture,” said Asbäck. A possible consolidation of competencies in one hand could therefore be quite sensitive and have a balancing effect if one does not get entangled in "particular interests," emphasizes Vadrot.

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here .