Green to Grey

How Europe is squandering the little nature it has left

Across Europe, hotels sprawl across pristine shores, highways rip through dense forests, concrete drowns vibrant wetlands. Bit by bit, we are losing green spaces that once sheltered wildlife, supplied food and removed carbon from the atmosphere.

Europe is turning grey. But how much is changing, and how fast?

In the first investigation of its kind, 41 journalists and scientists from 11 countries have come together for the Green to Grey project, initiated by Arena for Journalism in Europe and the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, NRK. We worked with scientists from the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) to refine their novel methodology for measuring nature loss. Using satellite imagery, artificial intelligence and on-the-ground reporting, our investigation reveals the true extent of lost nature and cropland in Europe.

Every year, Europe loses 1,500km² to construction. Between January 2018 and December 2023, we lost approximately 9,000km² – an area the size of Cyprus. This is close to 30km² destroyed every week, the equivalent of 600 football pitches every single day.

Nature accounts for the majority of these losses, at about 900km² a year. But our research shows agricultural land accounts for 600km² a year, with grave consequences for food security and health on the continent.

Each dot on the map represents an instance of lost nature or cropland – a centuries-old oak forest, a fertile field, a resting site for migratory birds – gone.

Our results show that undeveloped land in Europe is disappearing up to one and a half times faster than previously estimated.

Until now, the best Europe-wide estimates of nature loss have been based on official figures produced by the European Environment Agency (EEA), using a methodology that only detects large-scale construction projects from satellite imagery. The methodology we developed, however, allowed us to capture much smaller constructions, as well as many narrow roads and railways.

We found that four out of every five instances of construction occurred within populated areas already transformed by human activities. These include parks and green spaces in urban areas, essential for recreation, flood regulation and shade as summer temperatures soar.

We found many examples of precious nature, bulldozed to accommodate commercial activities, luxury homes and tourism. But the most common interventions, accounting for the majority of all cases, were to build housing or roads.

Scientists have long studied the impact of the large-scale destruction of nature in places like the Amazon rainforest. But in Europe, we heard repeatedly that we have relatively little nature left. Our research shows the grave impacts of cumulative small-scale losses of nature and cropland: “It's a slow-burning issue,” says Jan-Erik Petersen, ecosystem expert at the EEA. “It just accumulates over time.”

Guy Pe’er, conservation biologist from the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research, says: “If we allow these small-scale losses to continuously happen, we risk driving the system to a complete collapse. We are literally risking our health and security.”

In 2021, the EU set a goal to offset land taken for construction with an equal area of nature restoration elsewhere. The “no net land take by 2050” strategy is non-binding, and, our research shows, has so far failed to significantly reduce construction on previously unbuilt land.

No country spared

While the losses are Europe-wide, we found patterns in the data. In Scandinavia, forests are particularly affected. In southern Europe, coastal areas are being erased. Cropland loss is more prevalent in Central Europe, in places like Germany and Denmark, where nature has been depleted by years of pre-existing developments.

All countries are losing their natural and agricultural areas, but some are losing more than others. In absolute terms, Turkey tops the list with 1860km² of nature and cropland lost between 2018 and 2023, an area bigger than Greater London. Poland is next with more than 1000km² lost, followed by France and then Germany.

If we adjust based on the size of the country, then the Netherlands and Belgium, smaller but more densely populated, come out first. These countries build on a higher proportion of their total surface area each year compared to large countries with fewer inhabitants, such as Norway, Sweden, or Finland.

But if we adjust the figures based on population size, Scandinavian countries fare worse. Norway’s construction translates to roughly six square metres of nature and cropland every year for each resident. In Switzerland, per capita losses are ten times less.

The real stories, however, are beneath the numbers. In Italy, reporters discovered that Lake Garda, a world-famous biodiversity hotspot, is being overrun with developments in the name of sustainable tourism. In Poland, investment properties have popped up around land intended for protection by the EU. In Finland, areas of endangered nature were turned into a highway.

We found a golfing resort sprawling across a nature reserve in Portugal and a harbour for luxury yachts sunk into a wetland in Turkey. Alongside these major developments, in Lapland, we found the kind of small-scale interventions that are more common. Multiple tiny encroachments to service the desires of tourists, each one making a dent in the pristine nature that those same tourists come to see.

The main driver behind this is wealth, Peter Lacoere, a lecturer and researcher in architecture at University College Ghent, says. While population growth might seem a more obvious reason for land consumption, the more direct correlation in Europe is with wealth, since wealthy countries develop not only essential things, but unnecessary things, from golf courses to artificial ski slopes. “These images are a stark illustration of how we struggle to contain western consumerism,” he says.

'Only members allowed'

On top of Portugal’s famous Galé sand dunes, besides the ocean, stands a shiny new golf course. Cranes crowd the horizon, racing to finish luxury villas worth $7.5 million. The Costa Terra Ocean and Golf Club promises “the simple luxury of European living” on what it calls “the last untouched Atlantic coast in Southern Europe”. British royalty and Hollywood stars are said to be among its residents. Costa Terra, owned by the American company Discovery Land Co., is as exclusive as it gets.

The building project was nevertheless legally permitted. Construction is possible on Natura 2000 sites so long as it does not negatively impact the habitat. Exceptions can be made for projects of overriding public interest, if a developer is able to provide evidence that there are no alternative solutions.

A golf course does not fulfill this criteria, according to Ioannis Agapakis, lawyer for the environmental law NGO Client Earth: “The mere fact that you find economic benefits or some type of economic development from a project does not make it overriding public interest.”

European authorities initially agreed. In 2008, the European Commission issued its first written warning to Portugal about nature protection for failing to conduct appropriate impact assessments at the site. But construction went ahead after the Portuguese government cited socio-economic benefits and promised to implement conservation measures.

The European Commission spokesperson told us that the permission for the project was made “conditional to the definition of all conservation measures and their approval by the Portuguese authority (in this case, [Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests]) to ensure the overall coherence of Natura 2000.”

The Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests referred us to Costa Terra’s environmental impact assessment from 2012, in which the regional authorities approved the resort, claiming it would have a positive impact by increasing biodiversity, promoting job creation, and mitigating negative impacts.

Alongside the Natura 2000 network, European countries have their own measures for classifying and protecting vulnerable habitats. Using a database of such zones, we were able to estimate that between 2018 and 2023, there were more than 150,000 instances of construction on land that has been offered protection under EU, regional, national or local initiatives – more than 70 a day.

Private security patrols the entrance to Costa Terra, warning off members of the public. Access to the resort is granted only to those who own property and pay additional membership fees of more than 170,000 euros.

“This used to be a place where people came to spend time in nature, where children and young people would camp and people would spend their money in small businesses,” says Maria Prata, a representative of Reabrir a Galé, a group of local residents who oppose mass development in the area. “We want golf courses to be suspended not just here but all over Portugal.”

The group protests on the Galé beach next to Costa Terra, sheltering from the sweltering sun under bright parasols. They hold placards reading “Apartheid tourism!” and “No more water for golf!”.

Locals are not only concerned about the loss of land. Maintaining the golf course requires a minimum of 800,000 litres of water per day in a region regularly hit by droughts, where local aquifers are already under strain. “We are worried and frustrated,” says Maria. “The use of water for golf is shameful and irrational.”

They also worry about chemical contamination from fertilisers, which can cause health issues. Costa Terra uses a type of grass that requires three to five tonnes of nitrogen fertiliser every year. The biologist Guy Pe’er says that golf courses are “dead environments”, where intense management using pesticides and monoculture crops can have a devastating impact on surrounding nature. “Because dunes are sandy habitats, the fertilisers will pollute other parts within the Natura 2000 network,” he says.

A spokesperson for Costa Terra said: “We are developing CostaTerra to be a model for environmental stewardship and sustainability in the region. Every aspect of the property – from the design of the golf course, to rainwater and waste management practices, to the development and preservation of wildlife habitat and corridors – was designed to meet or exceed EU standards, including the Natura 2000 Framework.”

'My heart aches'

Turkey, the largest country in our analysis, also ranked highest for the total number of square kilometres lost between 2018 and 2023. In that time, Turkey built on 1,860km² of nature and cropland, accounting for more than one-fifth of the total loss in Europe. Among the devastation: a wetland site, home to spawning fish and several species of nesting bird, sacrificed for a massive luxury yacht-building facility.

The images show what was once a vital stop for migratory birds along Turkey’s Aegean coast. The Çaltılıdere wetland is now buried beneath more than one square kilometre of concrete – foundations for a facility that will repair and build luxury yachts. Officially designated as a wetland by Turkey, Çaltılıdere was home to flamingos, pelicans, cormorants, sea bream, and sea bass. Despite this, local authorities overturned its protected wetland status in 2017 after a tense and controversial local commission meeting.

Five months before the commission meeting, the president of YATEK Aslan Bilgi made their intentions clear in an interview with an industry magazine: “The previously given [affirmative] wetlands decision regarding this region is causing us to lose some time. We are working to get an opinion from Dokuz Eylül University. If we do not get the result we want, we will get an opinion from Ege University.”

They indeed got what they wanted. During the commission meeting, the governor’s office presented a fresh report from Ege University, contradicting earlier findings, that claimed Çaltılıdere “lost its ability to be a habitat for many species”. YATEK rallied around this report, and the governor’s office used it as the primary justification for its final decision.

“They manipulated the process,” said one of the commission members who fought hard to save the area and wanted to stay anonymous out of fear of reprisals, "and got the wetland status revoked.”

Unlike other commission members, he knew Çaltılıdere well and visited it often for birdwatching. “I still think about this place from time to time. And every time I think about it, my heart aches,” he said. “I don’t want to see what it has become.”

Wetlands and peatlands serve as vital carbon stores and natural flood protection. Their destruction can have dire consequences. “Wetlands act like natural sponges, retaining excess water during rainy periods and gradually releasing it during dry periods, mitigating the effects of both floods and droughts,” said Burçin Yaraşlı, a wetlands specialist with the Doğa Derneği, an environmental association in Izmir. “When these areas are destroyed, people living nearby directly face greater risks.”

YATEK claims the project will bring massive economic growth and thousands of jobs to the area, alongside annual exports worth 500 million euros. “The richest people in Turkey and in the world will bring their big yachts here and repair them or have them built,” a former YATEK director said in 2021.

But in Çaltılıdere, population 600, locals are divided. Some are holding out for jobs, or an increase in the financial value of their land. Others simply feel abandoned. “We couldn’t unite to oppose this together,” said one local fisherman. “Now, nothing is left. We are trapped.”

YATEK told us, “This investment is fully compliant with environmental regulations, respectful of nature and ecosystems, socially responsible, and economically beneficial for the region and the country as a whole.” The Izmir governor’s office did not reply to our request for comment.

Lapland turns grey

Jan-Erik Petersen, ecosystem expert at the EEA, says many of the most critical losses in Europe are in coastal zones affected by tourism and recreation: “Coastal zones are often home to very sensitive habitats, and developments there can have a bigger impact than in other places.”

But it’s the small-scale losses that really add up. Peter Verburg, professor in environmental spatial analysis at VU University Amsterdam says that the cumulative impact of many tiny developments is leading to global change: “You hear all the time that, ‘Oh, we gave this building permission because it was only 2000m², so what?' But if you add up all those permissions all over Europe, it’s a lot.” Our methodology allowed us to flag even relatively small-scale losses from single schools, wind turbines, and even cabins.

Reporters discovered that the top of Vermio mountains in northern Greece are being transformed from two so-called “Roadless Areas” of untouched nature into a large windfarm. Amazon has agreed to purchase all power from the Vermio project for the next 20 years. It is not yet clear whether the corporate giant intends to power datacentres or simply acquire clean power certificates. Our analysis showed that, in the past three years, around 60km of new roads were constructed in Roadless Areas of Greece to serve wind farms and at least 1.48km² of untouched nature was taken up by roads and wind turbines. “Merely months ago, it took courage to make the hike of 2,063 metres up to Vermio’s peak. Today, you can go there by car,” Giorgos Kasapidis, a local activist, says.

In Italy, the areas surrounding the iconic Garda Lake have been transformed by tourist developments, threatening the rich biodiversity of the region. Experts say the shore is being destroyed by sport tourism and claim attempts to protect the area do not work. “Protection is often applied only to marginal or little-frequented areas, while the zones of greatest tourist interest remain unprotected, exposing the lake ecosystem to rapid degradation,” says Osvaldo Negra, zoologist at MUSE, the Museum of Science in Trento. “An entire ecological community has been impoverished.”

Far from halting the ongoing destruction of Lake Garda’s fragile ecosystem, local authorities are planning further development to accommodate tourists, which now far outnumber residents. “We are unable to contemplate the concept of limits. More roads, more beds, more infrastructure do not solve the problem, they simply attract more tourists and more pressure,” says Francesco Visentin, professor in human geography at University of Udine.

Peter Lacoere calls these losses “the tyranny of small decisions”. “Each decision in each municipality won’t change a lot, but when you add them all up over time, the consequences are massive for the environment,” he says.

Nature-loss to tourism does not only affect countries in the south. From inside the glass-roofed igloos at Utsjoki Arctic Resort in Finland, visitors gaze at pristine wilderness, the Arctic, the Northern Lights. But this is far from untouched nature. Six years ago, a forest stood where the resort now sprawls. Across the Finnish Lapland, we found that 15% of all construction projects that replaced nature since 2018 have been driven by tourism, often for accommodation, including cottages, hotels and cabins.

Rovaniemi, the capital of Lapland, has suffered the region's most significant losses. While Rovaniemi has just 60,000 residents, it receives an avalanche of visitors and counted 1.5 million overnight stays in 2024. As Rovaniemi grows more popular and crowded, tourists venture further afield in search of untrampled snow. Our data analysis revealed that in some highly-visited places in the region, more than half of new constructions were related to tourism activities.

Last spring, the municipal council of Inari approved 227 cottage plots along the shore of Lapland’s Lake Inari, in one of the remotest corners of Europe. These plots are located in old-growth forests where indigenous Sámi communities have for generations practiced reindeer herding. “What has been planned is completely absurd. Almost all reindeer herders are concerned about these kinds of developments, whether it’s logging, mining or tourism competing for the same land,” said Elle Maarit Arttijeff, an Inari Sámi reindeer herder, lamenting what amounts to the reversal of a 20-year settlement reached between the state-owned forestry company and herders to protect pastures in the area. “It is so terribly stressful and sad.”

Building on habitats means losing not just animals or native plants, but also crucial natural defenses against extreme weather and rising temperatures. More buildings bring more heat and a higher risk of flooding, at a time when Europe, along with the Arctic, is warming faster than any other continent. Gunnar Austrheim, professor in biology at NTNU in Trondheim, co-authored a IPBES Report which concluded in 2018 that Europe and Central Asia were facing a crisis that would require profound societal changes to change course. Our investigation, he says, shows that politicians failed to act, instead embracing “business as usual”.

Lena Schilling, a Green MEP, says that every forest, fertile field, and biodiversity hotspot destroyed for short-term profit is a betrayal of the promises we made to young people. “For years, the EU has promised to lead on climate and nature protection, but what this investigation shows is that we are literally cementing over our own future,” she says.

In 2024, the EU approved the Nature Restoration Regulation – a pioneering law that aims to revive 90% of degraded habitats across the EU by 2050. For the first time, national governments are obliged to set deadlines and meet targets on nature conservation. The regulation has faced intense pushback from the farming and forestry sector. Questions remain about how these measures will be financed and enforced, as the EU has promised to cut red tape for businesses and has rolled back a number of its ambitious environmental goals in the past year.

Existing laws protecting nature might be next on the chopping board, warn environmental NGOs responsible for a petition, signed by 200,000 EU citizens, calling for current measures to be maintained. Meanwhile, forthcoming EU soil legislation makes no commitment to “no net land take by 2050”. In September, the European Environment Agency admitted in its state of the environment report that the EU target of no net land take by 2050 is unlikely to be met.

Peter Verburg from VU University Amsterdam says that to reach no net land take by 2050, European countries need intermediate, legally-binding goals.

“This determines our future, we cannot live in a stone desert,” Verburg says. “We need green space. We need to see trees. We need nature to support us, especially with climate change.”