In a new assessment published Wednesday, auditors found that the LIFE strategic projects, designed to help member states implement environmental and climate laws, have not demonstrated clear results—despite receiving hundreds of millions of euros in EU support.
After reviewing 22 projects in Finland, Poland and Spain, the ECA concluded that gaps in monitoring, scattered priorities and inconsistent data reporting make it impossible to determine whether the projects are meaningfully contributing to EU goals such as restoring nature, improving water and air quality, or reinforcing climate resilience.
‘Impact remains unclear'
Strategic projects under LIFE are intended to serve as high-impact interventions—coordinating national authorities, mobilising additional investment and enabling large-scale implementation of environmental legislation. But auditors say these ambitions often fall short.
"Current monitoring approaches do not allow an adequate evaluation of the contribution made by LIFE strategic projects," the report states, pointing to a lack of reliable information on how much funding was actually spent and what long-term benefits were achieved.
Joëlle Elvinger, the ECA member responsible for the audit, said many projects failed to reflect the most urgent environmental needs in their respective countries. Lessons learned were shared only sporadically, she added, limiting broader uptake across the EU.
Funding grows while accountability lags
The auditors' warning comes days after the European Commission approved €358 million for 123 new LIFE projects, even as questions mount over the programme's transparency and long-term strategy.
Between 2014 and 2020, LIFE allocated €701 million to 70 strategic projects. Since 2021, another €436 million has been awarded to 25 projects. Yet despite the substantial funding, the Commission has not consistently published data on actual expenditures, relying instead on forecasts and projected figures.
Previous Commission reviews highlight successes—such as improving the conservation status of 435 species and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and nitrogen oxides. But auditors say these achievements are difficult to verify or link directly to LIFE's strategic streams.
Critics warn of shift toward industry—and away from biodiversity
The programme's future has come under scrutiny since the Commission announced plans to fold LIFE funding into broader competitiveness and cohesion tools under the next EU budget cycle (2028–2036).
Environmental groups say the move risks sidelining biodiversity and climate priorities at a time when ecosystems are under growing pressure.
Patrick ten Brink of the European Environmental Bureau called the proposal "a form of sabotage", arguing that dismantling dedicated LIFE funding threatens one of the EU's "most effective tools" for nature protection.
Think tanks also warn that incorporating LIFE into industrial funding frameworks could dilute the environmental focus. "Biodiversity risks becoming marginalised," said Brooke Moore of the European Policy Centre, noting that LIFE's signature priorities may be absorbed under generic categories such as "bioeconomy".
A Commission spokesperson stressed that LIFE-type actions will still be financed, but through National and Regional Partnership Plans and a new Competitiveness Fund. However, several member states are pushing back.
One EU diplomat said that dissolving the LIFE brand "is not the most constructive approach," adding that negotiations on the upcoming multiannual budget remain open.