Entries by YEE

,

Calling All Environmental & Climate Defenders in Europe!

Calling All Environmental & Climate Defenders in Europe!

Your voice is essential—let’s make it count.

Share









Related project

EN Co-funded by the EU_POS

Co-funded by the European Climate Foundation.

Co-funded by the European Climate Foundation.

Calling All Environmental & Climate Defenders in Europe!

Are you an environmental or climate defender in Europe, particularly involved in the youth movement? We want to hear from you!

We’re launching a major consultation to better understand the challenges, risks, and needs you face as a youth climate defender. Whether you’re dealing with legal barriers, threats, or simply in need of more resources – your experience matters.

Why get involved?

This consultation covers over 15 EU countries and aims to gather crucial insights that will:

  • 〇 Shape clear policy recommendations for the EU.
  • 〇 Inform strategies to support civil society and environmental defenders like you.
  • 〇 Help us organise workshops and training based on your most urgent needs.

What’s the impact?

By sharing your input, you’ll contribute directly to improving support systems for defenders, especially those facing difficult situations. The consultation results will be used to design solutions, from advocacy efforts to practical support resources, ensuring your safety and ability to continue your work.

Your privacy is safe!

Filling in this survey is completely safe, and your responses will remain confidential. All of your data is encrypted and handled with care, ensuring your privacy is fully protected.

What happens next?

  • 〇 We will map out the needs of defenders based on your responses.
  • 〇 A detailed report will be published and shared with key EU stakeholders, including those involved in the Aarhus Convention.
  • 〇 You’ll have access to workshops and materials that empower and equip you to overcome the challenges you face.

Take the survey now and help us build a stronger, safer movement for environmental and climate defenders across Europe.



I'm in!

18.10.2024 by
, , ,

Deconstructing Internalised Discrimination in Climate Activism

Deconstructing Internalised Discrimination in Climate Activism

#VoiceItRight

Share this article









Written by

Contents

Follow the #VoiceItRight campaign on



Instagram




Facebook

Climate activism has grown into a powerful global movement, uniting people from diverse backgrounds in the fight against environmental degradation. However, despite its inclusivity on the surface, the movement is not immune to deeper issues of internalised discrimination, particularly within its own ranks. 

Internalised discrimination refers to the unconscious acceptance of the dominant culture’s prejudices and stereotypes by marginalised individuals, often leading to self-limiting beliefs and actions

In the context of climate activism, this can manifest as the perpetuation of environmental racism, the marginalisation of non-Western perspectives, and the reinforcement of Eurocentric ideologies that fail to account for the diverse experiences and knowledge systems of affected communities.

Internalised discrimination in climate activism can have several detrimental effects:

  • 〇 It may lead to the exclusion of voices from the Global South, Indigenous communities, and other marginalised groups, whose experiences and traditional knowledge are crucial in crafting effective and just climate solutions. 
  • 〇 It can create a hierarchical structure within the movement that prioritises certain voices over others, often aligning with historical patterns of oppression and colonialism. This not only weakens the movement’s moral foundation but also undermines its effectiveness by disregarding comprehensive and culturally relevant solutions to climate challenges.

Key Issues

  1. Environmental Racism: Internalised discrimination often manifests through environmental racism, where the voices of marginalised communities, particularly those of colour, are sidelined or ignored in environmental advocacy. These communities are disproportionately affected by environmental hazards yet frequently excluded from decision-making processes. Addressing internalised discrimination requires acknowledging and actively countering this imbalance.
  2. Eurocentric Thinking: Climate activism, particularly in Western contexts, can be dominated by Eurocentric thinking that overlooks or undervalues the contributions and perspectives of non-Western cultures. This can lead to the imposition of solutions that are not suitable for all regions, particularly those in the Global South, where the impacts of climate change are most severe. Deconstructing this bias involves recognising the value of indigenous knowledge and practices, and integrating these into the global discourse on climate action.
  3. Bias and Representation: Activists from marginalised backgrounds may internalise negative stereotypes, leading to self-doubt or a belief that their perspectives are less valid. This can result in lower participation rates among these groups, reinforcing the dominance of more privileged voices. Combating this requires intentional strategies to uplift and empower underrepresented activists within the movement.

Strategies for Change

  • Education and Awareness: Raising awareness about internalised discrimination and its impact on the movement is a crucial first step. Educational initiatives should focus on helping activists recognise and address their own biases, as well as those embedded in the movement’s structures.
  • Inclusive Leadership: Promoting leadership roles for individuals from marginalised communities can help diversify perspectives and approaches within the movement. This can also provide role models for others, fostering a more inclusive environment.
  • Cross-Cultural Collaboration: Encouraging partnerships between activists from different cultural backgrounds can help break down Eurocentric barriers and foster a more global perspective on climate action. These collaborations should be based on mutual respect and a recognition of the unique contributions each group brings to the table.
  • Policy Advocacy: Advocating for policies that address environmental racism and promote equity in climate action is essential. This includes pushing for greater inclusion of marginalised communities in decision-making processes at all levels.

Deconstructing internalised discrimination within climate activism is essential for building a truly inclusive and effective movement. By addressing issues like environmental racism and Eurocentric thinking, and by promoting strategies for inclusive leadership and cross-cultural collaboration, we can ensure that the voices of all those affected by climate change are heard and valued. This not only strengthens the movement but also leads to more just and sustainable solutions to the global climate crisis.

More articles from the #VoiceItRight campaign

10.10.2024 by
, , ,

Overcoming barriers to inclusive language

Overcoming barriers to inclusive language

#VoiceItRight

Share this article









Written by

Contents

Sources:

Follow the #VoiceItRight campaign on



Instagram




Facebook

As we already mentioned, in the context of youth work and climate activism, language plays a pivotal role in shaping perceptions, influencing behaviour and reflecting values. Inclusive language ensures that climate activism is accessible and welcoming to all, regardless of background or identity. 

This is crucial to avoid bias, stereotypes or expressions that discriminate against groups of people based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, disability or other factors. 

Inclusive (intercultural) communication: is a transparent, truthful, accessible, and engaging communication that reflects the diversity of the society, promotes a climate of openness to intercultural encounters, and creates a shared sense of belonging.

Understanding barriers to inclusive language

If we want to foster inclusive language in our work for climate action it is important to recognise obstacles and barriers that can be hinder climate activism initiatives and inadvertently marginalise groups. In fact, many environmental terms were developed in context that did not prioritise inclusivity. For instance, the term “Developing countries” can be considered paternalistic. 

Lack of diversity within environmental movements and youth organisations can lead to the exclusion of voices and perspectives that could otherwise share best practices and useful approaches to foster inclusivity. 

By understanding and addressing these barriers we can foster communication that is equitable, accessible and truly representative of diverse perspectives. This awareness can help us to avoid language that can unintentionally exclude, alienate, or marginalise certain groups, perpetuating existing inequalities and limiting participation. A language that is inclusive and culturally sensitive serves as a tool for empowerment, fostering dialogue, and building inclusive movements that reflect the needs and contributions of all people.

Prevalence of technical language

The extensive use of jargon and technical language can make environmental issues seem inaccessible or irrelevant to those without a background in the field. In fact, too often scientists use the deceptively passive “neutral” language to explain climate change-related events to better reflect both scientific accuracy and the true gravity of the situation. 

At the same time, the media tend to follow the scientists’ lead, by adopting the so-called “neutral” language in order to avoid alarming anyone with any uncomfortable emotions. 

This has serious consequences, as it may limit the reach of activism’ initiatives. In fact, only people with certain knowledge on the topic or educational levels feel qualified to participate. 

Cultural and linguistic differences

Environmental activism often originates in contexts where the dominant cultural norms shape the discourse, potentially excluding those from different cultural backgrounds who may have unique perspectives on environmental issues. A core example of this is the role of indigenous communities, who are often at the forefront of environmental stewardship and yet could find their voices marginalised if the language used does not reflect their experiences. 

Western-centric approaches

Too often environmentalism has been shaped by and centred on western perspectives. This western-dominated approach typically emphases certain principles, practices and solutions that may not align with the environmental realities or cultural values of non-Western communities.

An example of this approach relies on the focus on conservation efforts like national parks or wildlife reserves, which are rooted in the idea of preserving “pristine” nature. Despite the good intentions behind these methods, they might hinder or even undermine the traditional ecological knowledge of indigenous and local communities who have been sustainably managing their environments for generations.

Another consistent difference is the tendency of framing environmental issues through a lens of individual responsibility. This includes reducing personal carbon footprints or adopting a sustainable lifestyle. Although these actions are important, they often do not consider structural inequalities that disproportionately affect non-Western and vulnerable groups. In fact, most communities in the Global South who contribute the least to global carbon emissions are the most affected by and suffer the most from the consequences of climate change. However, the dominant narrative may place undue emphasis on individual actions without addressing the larger, systemic forces driving environmental degradation.

Stereotypes

A certain use of language can perpetuate stereotypes and bias or fail to acknowledge systemic inequalities. This has the potential to alienate marginalised groups. For instance, framing environmental issues solely in terms of individual responsibility can overlook the disproportionate impact of environmental degradation on low-income and vulnerable communities, who may have less capacity to effect change through personal choices alone. As a consequence, feelings of exclusion or frustration can characterize those who feel that their struggles are not being adequately addressed. 

How to ensure inclusive (intercultural) communication

According to the Council of Europe guidelines, we can distinguish three key components of inclusive communication.

  • Accessibility for everyone
  • Representativity of the population
  • Narratives that favour openness to valuing diversity.

Accessibility

Everyone has access to – and ability to understand and feel targeted by – public communication and information that is needed to fully enjoy their rights. The words and images used, the communication channels, the language style and availability of the core information in several languages, are important features for inclusive communication.

In environmental activism it is crucial to keep a simple language in order to allow the message to come across and reach a larger audience. In fact, language barriers are a problem for English speakers all over the world, not just non-native speakers. As the majority of projects are conducted in a language not native to the participants and the audience, there will inevitably be language challenges.  Also, the discourse surrounding climate change is characterised by complex jargon, unclear definitions, and a constantly changing language.

Furthermore, equality has always to be taken into account: as societies are even more diverse and multicultural, it may be necessary to provide contents in different languages, by providing translations or subtitles. 

When having conversations about climate change, linguistic inclusiveness shouldn’t come last. It is critical that we spread the word about how crucial it is to include linguistic diversity in climate solutions. 

It is equally important to use gender-neutral language to describe a group of people in order to avoid generating a feeling of exclusion.  

Representativity

In the context of climate activism, it is essential to embrace pluralism in the environmental discourse, in order to incorporate a wide range of voices, particularly those from non-western and marginalised communities. 

A clear example are indigenous people, whose wisdom and customs to reduce the effects of climate change’s effects can be complementary to our competence to safeguard the planet. Furthermore, SDG17—partnership, which is at the centre of the Sustainable Development Goals—is also in jeopardy when there is a lack of inclusivity in the discourse.

Inclusive and alternative narratives

By ‘alternative narratives’ we intend pluralist, progressive, and human-rights-based communications of facts and commentaries in relation to phenomena which may be subjected to prejudice, stereotypes and hate speech. In this sense, alternative narratives are a form of constructive and inclusive communication, promoting critical thinking while avoiding a paternalistic or morally superior attitude. 

In the framework of climate action, the human rights-based approach is translated into the attention to how environmental issues disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. This leads to the use of a language that advocates for the rights and well-being of marginalised groups. 

By framing environmental issues within a human rights context, we can highlight the connections between environmental justice and social justice, ensuring that the movement addresses both environmental degradation and the inequalities that exacerbate it. 

Adopting alternative narratives means also avoiding paternalism and morally superior tone, by encouraging people to dialogue and questioning dominant narratives. This approach fosters a more collaborative and respectful movement where all participants feel valued and heard, without making them feel like they are being talked down to or excluded. 

The core point is to focus on building bridges and being mindful of how language can bring people together rather than alienate and divide them. By using inclusive and culturally sensitive language, we can avoid reinforcing existing prejudices and perpetuating stereotypes. 

More articles from the #VoiceItRight campaign

16.9.2024 by
, ,

Diving deeper into eco-emotions: Youth & Activism

Diving deeper into eco-emotions: Youth & Activism

Join an online conversation with Panu Pihkala and Juni Sinkkonen.

Practical information

  • When

    18th September 2024 at 17 CEST

  • Where

    Online

  • Fees

    Free

  • How

    Youtube Live

Funded by

Related project

Dealing with Eco-Anxiety

Share This Event








Have questions? Get in touch!



Let’s talk mental health – from one climate activist to another!

For this webinar led by our project’s eco-emotions expert Juni Sinkkonen, we have invited Pimpichcha Sullivan-Tailyour from Force of Nature and Natalie Heller from Climate Mental Health Network to have an open conversation about what concerns climate activists today, and how they’re coping with emotion (over)load. 

We will discuss:

  • Personal journeys into climate activism;
  • Activism burnout and everything that comes with it;
  • How to take sustainable climate action.

Speakers

Juni Sinkkonen

The webinar is led by Juni Sinkkonen. Juni is a certified psychologist and eco-emotion expert, who has done research on you ng climate activists and their identities. She will start her PhD in autumn 2024 examining the interrelation between the field of psychology and the societal sustainability transformation.

Natalie Heller

Natalie Heller sits on the Gen-Z board of the Climate Mental Health Network and studies Public Health and Environmental Studies at George Washington University. As an advisor, she works on ways to include youth in the climate mental health movement and how older generations can support it.

Pimpichcha Sullivan-Tailyour

Pimpichcha Sullivan-Tailyour is a youth climate activist and environmental science student at Kings College London. Her activism has mainly consisted of deepening youth’s connection with climate activism, whether it is through education, listening circles or bridging intergenerational conversations. She explores how systems change the vision for the future.

Missed the webinar? Catch the recording now!

Other upcoming events

11.9.2024 by
, , ,

The impact of language on perceptions of climate change

The impact of language on perceptions of climate change

#VoiceItRight

Share this article









Written by

Contents

Sources:

Follow the #VoiceItRight campaign on



Instagram




Facebook

Language is more than just a means of communication; it’s the lens through which we view the world, shape our thoughts, and engage with each other. In the realm of climate activism, language serves as a powerful tool that can either unite or divide, empower or marginalise.

Imagine language as the thread that weaves the fabric of our collective consciousness. The words we choose can spark action, inspire hope, and bring about change. But they can also perpetuate stereotypes, alienate those who are already vulnerable, and reinforce existing power dynamics. This dual nature of language makes it a critical component in any social campaign, particularly one aimed at addressing the complexities of climate change.

Why do we need an inclusive language when talking about climate change?

When we talk about climate change, the language used often frames the issue in ways that are too technical, abstract, or detached from the lived realities of those most affected. Terms like “carbon footprint,” “mitigation,” and “adaptation” may resonate in policy circles, but they can feel distant or inaccessible to young people and marginalised communities. This disconnect is not just a barrier to understanding; it’s a barrier to action.

On the flip side, inclusive language invites participation and fosters a sense of ownership. For instance, using stories and experiences from marginalised communities can bring the abstract concept of climate change into sharp focus, making it relatable and urgent. Instead of merely talking about rising sea levels, we might share the story of a coastal community in the Global South that is losing its homes and heritage. Such narratives are not just informative; they are transformative.

The importance of language also extends to how we frame solutions. Eurocentric narratives often dominate the discourse, sidelining indigenous knowledge and local practices that have sustainably managed environments for centuries. By broadening our linguistic horizons and embracing diverse perspectives, we enrich the global conversation on climate action and ensure that solutions are culturally relevant and inclusive.

In youth work, the stakes are even higher. Young people are not just the leaders of tomorrow; they are the change-makers of today. The language we use with them can either empower them to take charge of their future or discourage them by making them feel excluded or unheard. Consider the difference between saying, “You are the future” versus “Your voice matters today.” The former, while well-meaning, places the burden of change on an undefined future, while the latter empowers youth to act now.

Language, Intersectionality, and Marginalised Youth

Intersectionality, a term coined by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, refers to the way different forms of discrimination—such as racism, sexism, and classism—intersect and create unique experiences of oppression for individuals, particularly those from marginalised groups.

The role of intersectional language in climate activism

In the context of climate activism, language plays a pivotal role in either highlighting or obscuring these intersecting identities and the challenges they face.

For marginalised youth, especially those from communities of colour, low-income backgrounds, or non-Western cultures, the impact of climate change is not just an environmental issue but a deeply personal one that intersects with issues of social justice, economic inequality, and historical oppression. The language used in climate discourse often fails to capture these complexities, instead presenting a one-size-fits-all narrative that overlooks the nuanced realities of these young people.

When climate activism ignores intersectionality, it risks alienating the very groups that are most affected by climate change. For example, discussions that focus solely on carbon emissions without considering how environmental degradation disproportionately impacts low-income communities can render the concerns of these groups invisible. Similarly, climate campaigns that centre Western perspectives may inadvertently marginalise indigenous knowledge systems and the voices of youth from the Global South.

Language that acknowledges intersectionality, on the other hand, can empower marginalised youth by validating their experiences and recognising the unique challenges they face. It opens up space for their voices to be heard, not just as victims of climate change, but as leaders in the movement for environmental justice. For instance, instead of framing climate action as a universal issue with a single solution, language that emphasises intersectionality would highlight the diverse strategies needed to address the different ways in which climate change affects various communities.

Moreover, inclusive language in climate activism can help build bridges between different social movements, fostering solidarity across issues of race, gender, and class. By recognising that the fight against climate change is also a fight against systemic inequality, activists can create more holistic and effective strategies that resonate with a broader range of youth.

For marginalised youth, whose identities are often shaped by multiple layers of discrimination, language that reflects intersectionality can be a powerful tool of empowerment. It can validate their experiences, amplify their voices, and place them at the centre of climate action, where they belong. In doing so, it not only strengthens the climate movement but also ensures that the solutions we create are just, inclusive, and sustainable.

More articles from the #VoiceItRight campaign

Language is more than just a means of communication; it’s the lens through which we view the world, shape our thoughts, and


Read More

Inclusive language ensures that climate activism is accessible and welcoming to all, regardless of background or identity. This is crucial to avoid


Read More

Inclusive language ensures that climate activism is accessible and welcoming to all, regardless of background or identity. This is crucial to avoid


Read More

10.9.2024 by
,

Call for Applications: YEE Youth Scientific Advisory Board 2024/2025​

Call for Applications: YEE Youth Scientific Advisory Board 2024/2025



Apply now

7-10 h/ month

Volunteering

remote

1 year mandate

Start October 2024

Join the YEE Youth Scientific Advisory Board (YSAB)!

Youth and Environment Europe (YEE) is looking for dedicated individuals to join our Youth Scientific Advisory Board (YSAB). As a member, you will play a crucial role in supporting YEE’s projects, campaigns, advocacy actions, and training programs by providing essential and up-to-date information on selected environmental and climate topics.

This position is remote, and requires 7-10 hours of work per month on average. The membership of the scientific board will run for 1 year (with possible extension). 

Application deadline:

18th September 2024

Your responsibilities

  • ⚬ Provide scientific insights to ensure YEE’s actions, positions, and activities are aligned with the latest research.
  • ⚬Support the drafting of position papers to ensure YEE’s advocacy is backed by independent, youth-centred sources
  • ⚬ Contribute with data and resources for the development of handbooks, articles, and other educational materials.
  • ⚬ Help build capacity and raise awareness among young people on pressing environmental and climate issues.

What we offer



  • An opportunity to influence and shape youth-led environmental initiatives.


  • A platform to share your expertise and collaborate with like-minded individuals.


  • The chance to contribute to meaningful projects that place youth at the centre of environmental research and advocacy.

Candidates we are looking for

Expertise

Members shall be young students or young early career professionals with a background in hard science in one or more of the following fields:

3.9.2024 by
, , ,

We want Clean Air Now!

We want Clean Air Now!

YEE organises a fully-funded 3-days programme about clean air and a race in Berlin.



Sign up

Practical information

  • When

    5th to 7th September 2024

  • Where

    Berlin, Germany

  • Fees

    Fully funded

  • How

    Sign up

Funded by

Related project

Breathing for better future

Share This Event







Have questions? Get in touch!



Why are we doing this

The European legislative framework on air quality is being updated.  This is the perfect occasion to get involved in a matter of public health that concerns us all!

Our main goal is to show decision-makers that young people are mobilised and care about air quality issues. With our actions, we aim to urge member states to take responsibility for the transposition of the recently adopted Ambient air Quality directives and follow WHO recommendations.

Learn more about air quality legislation and the consequences of air pollution.

What do we have planned?

The Seminar: We want Clean Air Now! (5th – 6th of September)

Before action comes reflection. That is why we want to start by taking the time to talk about air quality.

Over the course of this 2 days seminar, we will:



  • delve into the key elements of air pollution, how it is measured and which consequences it has (from a medical, environmental and economic standpoint).


  • investigate the main causes of air pollution and work together to discuss concrete action points through interactive sessions.


  • be joined throughout this seminar by experts from different fields helping us to refine our thought process to ensure we come up with actionable solutions and a clear advocacy strategy.

Travel, accommodation, and public transport expenses will be reimbursed in accordance with our travel policy.

The Race: Run for Clean Air (7th September at app. 10 AM)

”Run for clean air” is a relay race designed to draw public attention towards the ongoing process of reforming the Ambient Air Quality legislative package.

With this run, we want to bring to light the issue of air pollution to the German population because Germany has been particularly reluctant to include ambitious air quality targets in the European law to safeguard the auto industry.

The race will consist of a 1km path, run by several teams representing different cities with various degrees of air pollution.

This race follows a similar style as previous event – “It’s not the finish line” – that we organised in Strasbourg on the day of the vote in the plenary session of the European Parliament of the last draft of the reform. 

While the race is open to seminar participants, we warmly welcome external participants to join as well.

All participants are required to:



  • Live in Europe*


  • Be younger than 35 at the time of the event

  • *Priority will be given to participants from Germany, France and Belgium

Other upcoming events

31.7.2024 by
, , ,

Going to court, again!

Going to court, again!

Interview with Fridays For Future Estonia

Last year, young activists from Fridays For Futre won Estonia’s first ever climate court case, where the state energy company Enefit was ordered to halt the construction of a new shale oil facility. Despite this, Enefit has been issued another construction permit, and the Estonian youth are going to court again. With this second lawsuit, Estonian climate activists are sending a clear message to Estonia and Europe: fossil fuels must be left in the ground, and youth will fight with all possible means.

Written by

Share this article









In October last year, Estonia’s supreme court ordered the state energy company Enefit to halt the construction of a shale oil facility. This ruling was the result of a case brought forward by a group of young Estonian climate activists, who in 2020 decided to take the municipality of Narva-Jõesuu to court for issuing a construction permit for the shale oil facility. The group of young people argued that the construction permit was given without adequately assessing its climate impacts and the commitments made under the Paris Agreement, as well as the European Union’s objective to achieve climate neutrality by 2050.

The court ruled that the municipality had assessed the climate impact well enough but not the environmental impact, and revoked the permit. For the first time in Estonia, the Supreme Court stated that the mitigation of climate change is a constitutional obligation.

This is one amongst several recent climate cases in Europe, where especially young people are taking their states to court, for inefficient climate action. In this case, it was Fridays for Future Estonia who stood behind the claim, eventually winning the court case. We have had the chance to speak with some of the young activists behind this case, to learn more about how climate litigation works and why it can be such a powerful tool for climate advocacy:

Last year you won Estonia’s first ever climate court case! What motivated you to use the legal system for your climate action? 

We went to court because we ran out of other options and we were not willing to accept the government constructing a new fossil fuel plant amid the climate crisis. We had already presented public appeals, and organised peaceful weekly climate strikes, not to mention online advocacy. Suing the plant was our last option. As long as the rule of law holds, legal action is the only tactic that authorities and businesses can’t ignore.

How did you start the process? What do you need in order to file a climate court case?

First, it is essential to understand the stages of the oil plant’s completion, specifically the stage at which the operation of the plant can be impeded. The oil plant requires several permits, such as the construction permit and the integrated permit. Initially, we successfully contested the construction permit issued to the plant. This time, we are challenging the integrated permit which allows the plant to operate. Legal experts from the Estonian Environmental Law Center helped us find shortcomings in the permits and prepare arguments for both court cases. We submitted two complaints against the integrated permit: one as an environmental organisation under the name MTÜ Loodusvõlu, and another by a young activist in the movement, to protect her rights. Since this time the case also involved issues regarding human rights and children’s rights, we formed a team of multiple lawyers of various backgrounds to cover all necessary areas of legal expertise. The most crucial aspects of initiating a climate lawsuit are finding the right moment in the long chain of decisions to challenge legally, then finding lawyers who are willing to bring an innovative case, and securing funding to pay them.

This year you are filing new complaints to the court, why?

On May 27, 2024, the Environmental Board of Estonia issued an integrated permit to the aforementioned state-owned oil plant, allowing it to operate for the next 10 years. This is the same plant that we already successfully challenged in court once. By issuing the integrated permit, the Board rejected the arguments presented by us and other environmental organisations, urging them to refuse the permit. The plant will produce shale oil, a fossil fuel so polluting that it is not compliant with EU environmental regulations. That is why the oil is exported and used for fuelling long-distance ships, thereby contributing to the export of carbon emissions.

We based our complaints on the following arguments.

  1. Firstly, by granting the oil plant an integrated permit, the Environmental Board did not sufficiently consider the plant’s climate impact. The plant will increase Estonia’s current greenhouse gas emissions by about 6% and will take approximately 20% of Estonia`s carbon budget, which, in turn, makes it harder to reach our climate goals. Additionally, the measures to mitigate the climate impact are inadequate and largely based on underdeveloped technologies, such as carbon capture.
  2. Secondly, by granting the complex permit, the harmful effects of the oil shale mining required for the plant’s operation on the natural environment were not taken into account. Groundwater layers and wetlands, including Natura 2000 areas, which are already degraded due to mining, would be damaged.
  3. Thirdly, there is no overriding public interest in operating the oil plant. It does not create a significant number of jobs, is not highly profitable, and does not ensure our energy security to the extent that we should collectively endure the environmental damage it causes. 
  4. Fourthly, the oil plant exacerbates climate change, which has dangerous consequences for people’s health, including children’s. For many people suffering from chronic diseases, the impacts of climate change are more serious than usual. For example, heatwaves, which have already become more frequent due to climate change, hinder adequate sleep and increase the likelihood of dangerous epileptic seizures.

What is your goal with the new court case?

We hope to revoke the integrated permit for the plant to stop the shale oil plant once and for all. This way we can push Estonia towards a climate-neutral economy and industry. We are trying to show to all fossil fuel enterprises that hope to burn the last of Estonia’s oil shale for rapid profit, that it is not going to be easy for them.

What would be your advice to a group of young people wanting to start something similar? What is the first thing to start with? 

The first piece of advice would be to not be afraid. Turning to court, especially against a powerful actor like a large corporation or even the government can feel very intimidating. However, even the youngest and most vulnerable people have the right to a healthy environment, including a safe climate, that states and businesses must respect. The second piece of advice would be to build a team so that you are never quite alone. We have greatly benefitted from working together with legal experts, environmental NGOs, and volunteers, who have all helped us with different skills and support.

How can other young people or youth organisations support your new court case?

You can help us by sharing our messages––international pressure could be an impactful way of pressuring the government to stop the plant. Our main court battles lie still ahead. These may last for several years and are going to be costly. We would very much appreciate if you could donate to help us cover the costs of the case: https://fridaysforfuture.ee/en/what-can-you-do/#donate

More from environmental law

We have had the opportunity to speak with Fridays for Future Estonia, about their decision to go to court, again! Last year, these young activists won Estonia’s first ever climate


Read More

Recommendations to the EU Commission on how to address the gaps in the exercise of Aarhus rights with regards to European youth.


Read More

Rivers – anywhere you are in Europe, there must be a river not far from you. Ancient Greeks would marvel at rivers like Gods. How have we now come to


Read More

How to sue a state - article

Many climate lawsuits are started by young people, including an ongoing climate lawsuit in Sweden led by a group called Aurora, led by over 600 youth and children, including Greta


Read More

The Environmental Law Team of YEE actively participated in the 15th Task Force on Access to Justice in Geneva, sharing valuable insights.


Read More

30.7.2024 by
,

Conclusion of the YEE Annual Meeting 2024

Conclusion of the YEE Annual Meeting 2024

Prague, 14 July 2024 – We are delighted to announce the successful conclusion of our Annual Meeting, held from 12-14 July 2024 in Prague. This event brought together our member organisations to discuss key issues, elect new leadership, and expand our network.

Overview

During the Annual Meeting in Prague, 22 official delegates from our member organisations gathered to discuss key issues such as strategic planning, member engagement, and future initiatives. The event also included the election of new board members and internal auditors. Additionally, we welcomed three new member organisations into our network and reviewed and voted upon membership cancellations.

Elections

 

Executive Board 2024/2025

We are pleased to introduce the newly elected Board Members for the 2024/2025 term. Their mandate officially began on 14 July 2024 and will continue for one year. The new board reflects our commitment to geographical and gender balance, ensuring diverse representation of our member organisations.

See the new YEE board members.

Internal Auditors

We are also pleased to introduce our new internal auditors (Alessia Scattaglia and Gzim Zhilivoda), who will play a crucial role in maintaining transparency and accountability within our organisation.

Membership Update

After the Annual Meeting, the YEE network gathers 45 member organisations from 24 countries.

New Member Organisations

We are excited to welcome three new member organisations to our network. Their inclusion strengthens our community and enhances our collective efforts.

The new members of the YEE network are:

Membership Cancellation

The YEE membership committee has reviewed and identified members who have been inactive for the past two years, have not paid membership fees, and have not attended an annual meeting during this period. These members have been notified but have not responded. Consequently, their membership cancellation has been put to a vote.

The YEE membership of all the below organisations have been canceled:

  • CliMates, France
  • Eco-Unesco , Ireland
  • DJN Germany
  • SYC, Armenia
  • United Vision, Czechia

Further more, Odyssea from Luxembourg requested the cancellation of their membership due to the dissolution of their youth department.

We look forward to a productive year ahead with our new board members, member organisations, and internal auditors!

More To Explore

23.7.2024 by
, ,

Everything you need to know about air pollution in the EU

Everything you need to know about air pollution in the EU

Written by

Contents

Share this article









What is air pollution?

First and foremost, it is important to distinguish between indoor air pollution and ambient air pollution, as the agents responsible for indoor and outdoor air pollution are not the same. The purpose of the reform voted April is related to ambient air.

Air pollution or poor air quality is referred to when the concentration of certain harmful substances is too high.

The WHO defines a list of pollutants responsible for numerous harmful effects. The main pollutants on this list are:

Fine particules (PM)

These are a collection of particles that can be of different natures (sulphates, nitrates, ammonia, sodium chloride, black carbon, mineral dust) which are too fine to settle and therefore remain suspended in the air. They are labelled as PM and are classified according to their diameter. Thus, PM2.5 are particles that are 2.5 micrometres in diameter.

Carbon monoxide (CO)

A toxic, colourless, odourless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon-based fuels such as wood, petrol, charcoal, natural gas, and kerosene.

Ozone (O3)

A gas that forms from other pollutants emitted by human activities as well as vegetation under the influence of solar activity. This is why ozone pollution is particularly noted in the summer during periods of intense heat.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

NO₂ is a gas commonly released during the combustion of fuels in the transport and industrial sectors.

Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

SO₂ is a colourless gas with a pungent smell. It is produced from the combustion of fossil fuels (coal and oil) and the smelting of sulphur-containing ores.

The WHO therefore defines guidelines on the concentration thresholds not to be exceeded to avoid effects on health and biodiversity. The concentration levels are expressed in micrograms per cubic metre, noted as µg/m³.

Learn more about WHO recommendations.

Where do these pollutants come from? 

To put it simply, almost all human activities contribute to pollution (although some natural elements can also cause high levels of pollution, such as a volcanic eruption or a forest fire).

Most of these pollutants are the result of the combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) and are therefore mainly linked to industries, particularly construction due to the production of cement and steel, or the energy sector, which requires the burning of large quantities of fossil materials. Road and air transport are another significant source of air pollution, and finally, the agricultural sector is also to be blamed.

What are the consequences of air pollution? 

On human health

The invisible particles penetrate the cells and organs of our body: our lungs, heart, blood, and brain. This leads to diseases such as asthma, strokes, heart attacks, cancer, dementia, and in many cases, death.

The WHO considers air pollution to be the most important environmental threat to humans in the world. Nearly 7 million premature deaths are attributable to it annually. In Europe, this is nearly 300,000 each year.

The WHO considers air pollution to be the most significant environmental threat to humans worldwide. Nearly 7 million premature deaths are attributed to it annually. In Europe, it accounts for nearly 300,000 deaths each year.

Economic impacts

Pollution hampers productivity by affecting workers, which severely impacts overall economic activity. According to the World Bank, the loss of global GDP attributable to air pollution is estimated at 6.1%. 

Additionally, the numerous diseases caused by this pollution are costly to taxpayers through healthcare systems. Air pollutants also affect agricultural yields, as indicated by the European Environment Agency, which estimates that some agricultural states have lost up to 5% of their wheat production, costing 1 billion euros.

On biodiversity

Certainly, these pollutants significantly affect ecosystems and vegetation, notably through a process called “eutrophication,” which involves the rapid growth of algae and aquatic plants, facilitated by concentrations of nitrogen oxides and ammonia in the air. When these plants decompose, they reduce oxygen levels, harming fish and other aquatic organisms. This phenomenon also leads to freshwater acidification and affects forest soils.

Key numbers to evaluate air pollution  

 

 

Good

Fair

moderate

poor

Very poor

Extremely poor

(PM2.5)

<10µg/m3

<20µg/m3

<25µg/m3

<50µg/m3

<75µg/m3

+80µg/m3

(PM10)

<20µg/m3

<40

<50

<100

<150

+160

(NO2)

<40µg/m3

<90

<120

<230

<340

+350

(O3)

<50µg/m3

<100

<130

<240

<380

+390

(SO2)

<100µg/m3

<200

<350

<500

<750

+760

Source : European Environmental Agency

The political context

Today, two main legal texts at the European Union level regulate air quality standards:

  1. Directive 2008/50/EC sets the objectives for ambient air quality to prevent or reduce the effects of air pollution on human health and the environment as a whole. It defines measures for the assessment of ambient air quality in all Member States as well as the conditions for obtaining information on ambient air quality. The Directive aims at increasing cooperation between the Member States in reducing air pollution.
  2. Directive 2004/107/EC is more of a technical. It sets mandatory levels of fine particles, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air and defines methods and criteria for the assessment of concentrations of these substances in the ambient air.

In 2022, the European Commission introduced a proposal to reform this legislative package.

The main elements of this reform are:



  • The merger of both directives into a single text


  • Strengthening air quality standards by updating mandatory concentration levels of harmful substances in ambient air closer to WHO recommendations


  • Increasing the number of quality sampling points in European cities


  • The introduction of a right to compensation for people who suffer from health issues related to air pollution levels above mandatory standards.

Yet a few issues remain with the current version of the draft. For starters, the new air quality standards remain above the pollution levels recommended by the WHO:

While the current draft of the directive lowers the values for fine particles (PM2,5) from 25 to 10 µg/m3 and for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) from 40 to 20 µg/m3. The most recent World Health Organisation (WHO) recommendations advise not to exceed 5 μg/m3 for PM2,5 and 10 μg/m3 for NO2.
If the current draft also includes a review clause, the review of the alignment of EU’s air quality standards with WHO will not be done before 2030

Secondly, the implementation deadline is too long. The main deadline for the implementation of the new standard is the 31st of January 2029, but the current draft includes a postponement clause allowing under certain conditions to extend the deadline till 2040

To find out more detailed information see the European Council’s press release.

More articles about air quality

Air pollution is a significant environmental challenge facing the European Union (EU). It is crucial to understand the various aspects and implications


Read More

18.7.2024 by