On one hand, the economy is a rational field: you must produce what there is a market for, what people want to buy, and do so using the least amount of resources possible. On the other hand, it is deeply emotional. Just look at the recent reactions of financial markets to geopolitics or to President Donald Trump's tariff announcements.

Estonia's economy can grow if we ourselves believe in its potential and if those who buy our products trust that they can consume with confidence, without needing to set money aside for a rainy day. Confidence in Estonia's economy is also bolstered by tax relief measures that leave people with more money in their pockets.

We want to do everything within our power as decision-makers to foster this confidence among both entrepreneurs and consumers. One way to remove obstacles to entrepreneurship is by reducing bureaucracy and making regulations simpler and clearer. In almost every sector, entrepreneurs deal with environmental usage, regulations, permits and impact assessments.

As climate minister, I assembled a package of legislative amendments — specifically, changes to eight laws — with the goal of reducing administrative burdens for both businesses and the state, while also creating legal clarity to prevent costly and time-consuming disputes. Protecting biodiversity and preserving a clean natural environment is absolutely essential, and this must be managed effectively. These proposals have now been approved by the government and are under discussion in the Riigikogu.

We are streamlining, clarifying and speeding up the environmental permitting process within the General Part of the Environmental Code Act. We are not making concessions in environmental protection, but the permitting system doesn't have to be complicated or disproportionate. For instance, we are eliminating the need for duplicate ministerial approvals. Public hearings will no longer be mandatory in every case, but only when there is genuine public interest or a specific request for one.

It is essential that public involvement and impact assessments are carried out effectively. For this reason, we want to allow separate Natura assessments in cases where there is no broader environmental impact. The cost and expected time of an appropriate Natura assessment are five times lower than those of a full environmental impact assessment.

Clear rules are also crucial in forestry. That's why we must identify and designate areas so valuable that they must be protected — fortunately, such areas exist in Estonia's forests and must be preserved. These include the most ecologically valuable forest areas located within limited management zones and protected sites, where the proposed legislation will formalize a ban on logging that has already been in effect for nearly three years in practice.

The legislative changes will maintain the ban on large-scale logging, but from forests located in limited management zones and protected sites, it will still be possible to collect a limited amount of firewood for everyday use (up to 5 cubic meters per hectare and a maximum of 20 cubic meters per property annually). Among other things, we are also exempting Natura 2000 forest habitats from land tax.

The security situation also affects environmental protection. The draft legislation establishes that:

• With the consent of the Environmental Board, nature conservation work may be suspended if it interferes with the achievement of national defense objectives. However, mitigation measures must still be implemented.
• Under certain conditions, a permanent habitat for a Category I protected bird species will not automatically be established around a nesting tree if the activity is necessary for primary and exceptionally urgent reasons, such as the development of defense training grounds.
• It will be possible to build in construction-restricted zones without prior consent from the Environmental Board during periods of heightened defense readiness, mobilization, demobilization, a state of emergency or a state of war.

Changes in shore and coastal protection to aid legal clarity

The chancellor of justice has for years emphasized the need to make regulations clearer. To preserve good water quality, ensure the natural functioning of coastal processes and protect residents from hazardous conditions, it is essential to maintain the natural state of shorelines and banks for at least 100 meters inland and 200 meters on islands. This is the area covered by the construction exclusion zone, and we are not changing that. This provision also ensures that people can enjoy natural resources, coastal beaches and lakeshores.

The proposed easing of the construction exclusion zone applies only to flood-prone areas, which can extend hundreds of meters inland — areas where a full protective buffer is not always appropriate. Local governments in particular have been awaiting this change, as they see the current exclusion zones as a barrier to development. Going forward, municipalities will have the authority to determine the size of exclusion zones within densely populated areas outside of protected zones, increasing their autonomy in managing local affairs.

The width of the construction exclusion zone will depend on the extent of the flood-prone area. Until now, the exclusion zone was 100 meters from the flood area on the mainland and 200 meters on islands. In the future, the restriction will begin 50 meters from the edge of the flood-prone area, but it will still remain at a minimum of 100 meters from the shoreline on the mainland and 200 meters on islands.

Additionally, the draft legislation includes amendments that make the criteria for placing land under protection, designating compensation areas and compensating for restrictions more straightforward and understandable. In the future, the state will no longer purchase land if the owner was already aware at the time of acquisition that it was planned to be placed under nature protection. Previously, this awareness factor had not been taken into account. Moreover, if a local government wishes to impose restrictions, it too — just like the state — must offer the landowner the option to divest the land.

The drafts also include a number of smaller, but important changes for stakeholders:

• It will be possible to allow the construction of roads or utility infrastructure in strict nature reserves under protection rules, which until now has only been permitted for protected areas or national defense needs.
• Bird and bat banding will become a paid service (currently, the state covers the cost).
• Hunting permits can be issued electronically.
• Prohibited activities that contribute to the spread or increase of invasive species will be more clearly defined.
• Environmental permit applicants will no longer need to include data on small combustion plants in their applications (under the Atmospheric Air Protection Act).
• Companies will be allowed to process up to one ton of biowaste without needing an environmental permit. This will affect kindergartens, cafeterias and others. Approximately 60 registrations have been issued under the current system (Waste Act).
• We will accelerate mining permit application processing by 30 days by removing the requirement for a second ministerial approval (Earth's Crust Act).
• For seaweed and shellfish farming, we are raising the permit threshold to encourage development in this sector (Water Act).
• Municipal waste haulers will no longer need to register twice. This affects 81 municipalities.
• Public discussions in environmental permit proceedings will only be required if proposed by the Environmental Board or requested by the local community. This will speed up the process (General Part of the Environmental Code Act).
• Waste transporters will be required to submit waste quantity data only in annual reports, instead of more frequently. This affects approximately 600 registered operators (Waste Act).
• Defense industry companies will no longer be required to submit data on military materials and products to the European Chemicals Agency (Waste Act).
• It will no longer be necessary to apply for a separate air pollution permit before a building permit, if an air permit is only needed once operations begin. This change will speed up project launch times (General Part of the Environmental Code Act).
• We are removing the requirement for an integrated permit for plywood production exceeding 600 cubic meters per day (currently, there are no such producers in Estonia) (Industrial Emissions Act).
• It will be clearly stated that building a bridge or culvert in a water body does not require a water environment risk activity registration. From October 2021 to 2025, 157 such registrations have been issued to 46 companies (Water Act).
• We are developing the KOTKAS environmental decision information system.

Why are we changing so many laws at once?

When making changes to the field of environmental permits, it is almost always necessary to amend multiple laws at once, because the regulations governing permits are scattered across various sector-specific acts, in addition to the General Part of the Environmental Code Act, which serves as an overarching framework. Therefore, amendments must be made across multiple fields.

In the Riigikogu, we will, of course, once again involve all interested parties in the discussions. However, since these are sensible and non-political changes, I hope for strong cooperation from all political groups as well as other partners. Estonia needs us all to believe in it — including through the practical simplification of procedures like these.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!