OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Luleå tekniska universitet

LTU

Vision 2030 We shape the future through innovative education and ground-breaking research results.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Massimiliano Esposito (Head of Unit Research and Innovation)

26 Nov 2025 · Horizon Europe 2028/2034

Meeting with Beatrice Timgren (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Nov 2025 · Raw Materials status and development

Response to Carbon Removal Certification

19 Mar 2023

EUROPAFORUM NORTHERN SWEDEN The four northernmost counties in Sweden are working together to influence EU-policy through the political network Europaforum Northern Sweden (EFNS). The work in EFNS is based on common interest and commitment from regional and local politicians and officials. What makes the EFNS network unique is the cross-party cooperation and that the region is represented by one united voice in EU policy. Please accept our points of view in regards to the proposal for Certification of carbon removals. 1. A Union carbon emissions certification framework should be designed as a framework to favor a free and open market. 2. A Union framework for carbon sequestration certification should be designed to favor carbon storage also in long-lived products such as wooden buildings. Long-term sequestered carbon in buildings should be included in the certification system. This would favor the production of high-quality timber which contributes to climate goals through a long growing season and therefore a high absorption of co2 before harvest. Coal sinks in buildings are significantly more reliable in the long term than coal sinks in standing forest, where there are risks in the form of storm damage, snow fall damage, rot, fire and extensive insect attacks. 3. A union framework for carbon sequestration certification should be based on voluntary participation on behalf of parties in the market such as landowners and wood builders. 4. An impact analysis is needed in regards to the effects on industries in forestry and agriculture. Is there a risk of lower production of essentials such as food and wood raw materials? If so, how big is this risk and what effects may this have on the EU's population, land users, the EU's supply and preparedness? 5. An independent review body is needed. 6. We say no to delegated acts or at least clear limitations of these written in the regulation. The member countries need to retain influence over the implementation. As an example, the monitoring system of land and thus land managers that the European Commission wants to introduce needs to be controlled by member states. 7. We say no to a central EU-based monitoring system. Instead, the nations themselves should manage surveillance based on a common EU criteria. 8. Monocultures should be included in the Certification of carbon removals framework. First, monocultures is highly unusual at least in Swedish commecial forestry. We have about 4-5 percent of this type of forest according to our one hundred years old university based forest monitoring system. A monoculture may be a result of a certain type of dry forest land where only one type of dry-resistant tree species survives. A monoculture may also be a result of a very long growth period where one species has grabbed all space and by a closed crown cover blocked sunlight to reach the ground and therefore hindered any other species to grow. This may be an oak or beach forest which are highly valuable forests. It makes no sense to exclude these types of forests from a carbon removal system.
Read full response

Meeting with Jakop G. Dalunde (Member of the European Parliament)

24 Aug 2022 · Research & Innovation

Response to New EU Forest Monitoring and Strategic Planning Framework

5 May 2022

We object to the initiative presented by the European Commission on monitoring of forests in the EU and strategic EU planning of management of forests within the EU.  One main objection we have is that we are worried that satellite surveillance at the supra-state level, combined with supra-state level strategic planning for forest management, may hamper motivations with regards to forest care in our local farm and forestry communities in Sweden. Over the last 120 years Swedish forest owners have managed to more than doubled the carbon sink on our vast forest lands while also producing renewable materials for housing, heating, making tools and thousands of other products originating from healthy and beautiful forests. This is due to great national focus on forests from all levels of society: from forest owners to owners´ cooperatives, to industries, to surveillance from national authorities, to monitoring of biodiversity, to protection of waters, and to monitoring of harvest levels and re-planting of forest land with 380 million new plants every year. From 1903 onwards all harvested forest land needs to be reforested within a few years, either naturally or through plants. According to a 2021 survey, 58 percent of Swedish family farm foresters, corresponding to about 200 000 people, place a high rating on spending time in their forest while hunting, fishing, enjoying the birds, the trees, picking berries, in short connecting to the land. Our family farm foresters are also Sweden´s major producers of wood for the forest industry, which ranks third in the world for exports of sawn timber, currently the only renewable building material at hand. The results of decisions made today by Swedish family farm forests (e.g. the baby trees they plant, the care they provide in order for the young trees to grow), may never be visible to the forest owners over the course of their own lifetime as it can take more than one hundred years before the trees are harvested. Therefore, it is really up to the individual to carefully determine what may be attractive wood one hundred years from now and combine that decision with his or her knowledge of the land e.g. when it comes to soil type, the specific winds in the area, moisture, light, and ongoing climate change challenges. As there are many different forest owners, many different decisions are being made, which in turn create diverse landscapes and diverse forest lands. The strategic plans of one forest owner will differ from that of other forest owners, creating a vital robustness in the forest management system as a whole, in other words an insurance against possible unfortunate decision making. This is made possible due to our general Swedish forest management policy of ”freedom under responsibility”. By implementing a supra-state EU satellite surveillance of their land, central strategic management with the requirement of reporting forest management activities to the EU, Swedish family forest owners may lose their motivation to continue to do what they have done so successfully for over more than one hundred years. Apart from these worries we would like to emphasize the fact that forest management is a national issue and that the principle of subsidiarity is very important towards achieving successful forest management. EFNS Europaforum Northern Sweden http://www.europaforum.nu/ through North Sweden European Office northsweden.eu
Read full response