Distorted Biodiversity Report: Political Interference

The comprehensive report on the state of biodiversity, presented last year by the Federal Office for the Environment, caused concern among experts.

The accompanying press release painted an optimistic picture of the situation. The agency downplayed the seriousness of the situation.

But that was only the tip of the iceberg, as is now becoming clear. Both in the press release and in the scientific foundations, the Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications (DETEC), to which FOEN belongs, embellishes reports containing unfavorable facts about biodiversity.

This is evident in the FOEN report «Impacts of the Action Plan for Biodiversity«, published in June 2023. It examines whether Switzerland is meeting its biodiversity targets.

Progress with regard to biodiversity is presented in quite a positive light. Yet this does not reflect reality. An analysis of the published report compared to internal and external assessments that served as the basis for the report shows that this is not the case.

Furthermore, key statements in the FOEN report, particularly regarding agriculture and hydropower, were rephrased or removed. This emerges from an analysis by the newspaper «Die Republik», which compared the published report with internal versions requested from Republik under the Freedom of Information Act.

These are just some of the disputed modifications in the FOEN report. Data indicating the growing threat to biodiversity, as well as the fact that current measures are inadequate and that Switzerland is not meeting its targets, were altered or watered down.

Intimidating inner workings of the General Secretariat

Despite the changes, the BAFU explains in a brief statement to the Republik: «It is common practice to make changes in the production process. The published version of the report is based on facts and data that must be presented appropriately.»

The office does not disclose any information about the authors of the changes. However, the most direct interventions occurred in the version that the BAFU drafted for the General Secretariat of the DETEC. This suggests that the staff of the SVP Federal Councillor, under the leadership of Federal Councillor Albert Rösti, who has headed the department since 2023, intervened in the report.

As already revealed by the Republik, Rösti's Secretary General, Yves Bichsel, steers the department in line with the SVP using ruthless methods, bypassing scientific foundations.

This means that economic interests take precedence, whether in agriculture or hydropower, while environmental protection is neglected. Furthermore, Rösti was president of the Swiss Water Management Association prior to his election to the Federal Council.

The Swiss Academy of Sciences notes in a statement on the Republik's investigation that biodiversity in Switzerland continues to decline despite promotional measures.«Facts can be removed from a report, but do not lose their validity».

«These changes demonstrate an attempt to minimise the problems in the area of biodiversity in Switzerland or to paint a rosier picture of the situation», says Raffael Ayé, Director of the nature conservation organisation BirdLife Switzerland. «The fact that the federal administration subsequently removes or censors inconvenient statements is neither transparent nor helpful.»

Costly reports ignored

In 2012, the Federal Council set itself the goal of improving the state of biodiversity and adopted the Swiss Biodiversity Strategy. Within this strategy, ten targets were established to be achieved by 2020. However, the corresponding action plan was not implemented until 2017, after a delay of several years. In 2021, policymakers wanted to know whether the plan was working.

The FOEN commissioned five external and one internal evaluation for this purpose and summarized the results in an impact analysis of the action plan. Apparently, the Department of the Environment did not want the costly evaluation results from late 2021 to stand as they were. They showed that only one third of the measures were on track.

The FOEN conducted a further evaluation that yielded more positive results. According to this internal assessment by the FOEN, more than half of the measures were on track by the end of 2022. Here, the agency once again distorted well-supported conclusions while Simonetta Sommaruga was Minister of the Environment.

This is misleading, criticizes Raffael Ayé of BirdLife. According to Ayé, who was also part of the report's advisory group, the federal administration did not accelerate the implementation of the projects, but simply reduced the targets.

The Department of the Environment does not dispute this. The report states: «The acceleration of the implementation of the work was accompanied by a reduction in targets and thus in the effectiveness of the measures and projects in favor of biodiversity…». This was done in accordance with the recommendations of the evaluation reports, the FOEN notes in response to an inquiry.

Control commission examines closely

The Republik informed politicians about its research and the situation in Rösti's department. They are surprised.

National Councillor of the Social Democratic Party Martina Munz, a member of the Environment Committee, says: «I am shocked. It cannot be that technical reports from the authorities are embellished and used for political purposes.»

Kathrin Bertschy of the Green Party is also puzzled. Ten years ago she was part of the advisory group for the biodiversity strategy and says: «If even the few agreed measures are not correctly assessed from a technical perspective, then that is cause for despair.»

Council of States member Heidi Z’graggen chairs the sub-committee of the Control Committee, which three years ago concluded in a report that the measures taken to protect biodiversity are not sufficiently effective. The committee recommended that the Federal Council do more and allocate more personnel, in particular in the area of agriculture, and to review the subsidies that contribute to biodiversity loss.

«We are currently examining, as part of the follow-up review, whether the Federal Council has implemented our three recommendations», explains Z’graggen. Regarding the findings of Republik, she states: «In principle, scientific findings are crucial for informed decisions.» What politics makes of them, however, is a different question. «But it is important that explanations are given as to why the recommendations have or have not been implemented.»

Biodiversity currently receives little support in parliament. The Federal Council sought to introduce new measures to combat species loss, including the biodiversity initiative, which will be put to a vote this autumn, but attempted to water it down. This initiative calls for more funding for the protection of biodiversity and its entrenchment in the constitution.

The Council of States, however, did not even want to discuss the federal law relating to the initiative and rejected it outright, primarily due to resistance from the farmers' association. It is even attempting to reverse the initiative.

Years ago, parliament decided that farmers should convert 3.5 percent of their land into biodiversity areas. Implementation was postponed twice, most recently in December of last year. This despite the fact that the president of the farmers' association, Markus Ritter, had promoted this measure in the campaign against the drinking water and pesticide initiatives.

The National Council decided in February to remove this requirement entirely, which even the Federal Council described as a «breach of good faith». If the Council of States approves this, as seems likely, the requirement will be struck.

Already occurring under Federal Councillor Sommaruga's leadership

The poor conditions within the Federal Office for the Environment have a long history. Even Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga chose not to implement one of the ten objectives of the Swiss Biodiversity Strategy: communication. The Federal Council's strategy stipulates that by 2020 «knowledge about biodiversity within society should be sufficient». This knowledge was to be made accessible and comprehensible to the general public, which the Federal Council included in the action plan.

The population in fact assesses the situation regarding species loss more positively than it actually is.According to surveys, the majority believes, that biodiversity in Switzerland is in good condition, although a third of species and half of the habitats in Switzerland are endangered.

In an effort to close this gap between perception and reality, the FOEN launched a comprehensive communications campaign in 2020. The contract was to cost almost 9 million francs, but was stopped shortly before it was awarded by Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga.

Why Sommaruga stopped the communications project remains unclear. It is known that she was under pressure and did not want to open another front of attack in the Federal Council, where she often found herself in the minority. Possibly out of fear of increasing accusations of state propaganda. Reference was made to the biodiversity initiative, which was being put forward at the time: ahead of a vote, the authorities were expected to proceed with restraint.

Yet there is a significant gap in communication about biodiversity and measures for its conservation. This is the conclusion of four of the five reports commissioned by the FOEN on the impact of the action plan. They recommended closing this gap as quickly as possible.

To this day, this has not happened. The FOEN's report on the action plan devotes only two sentences to this topic. It proposes to strengthen «general communication».

This allows the public to believe that the situation is better than it actually is, and less pressure is generated to make uncomfortable decisions.

Climate of Fear

Given all of this, it is hardly surprising that there is deep dissatisfaction within the Federal Office for the Environment. Many employees are leaving the institution. Yet no one wishes to speak about it. Even those who have resigned refer the media to their former employer.

FOEN employees expressed views in a survey conducted by the Federal Staff Association in August 2022 that confirm the findings of Republik. They criticize the fact that expertise is frequently given less weight than political considerations. They feel that they are expected to represent the desired position from above, rather than the professionally correct one. This is perceived as strongly hierarchical control.

The Director of the FOEN, Katrin Schneeberger, has come under criticism. The survey report refers to a «lack of clear and strong advocacy and commitment to environmental concerns». Rather than defending the environmental issues enshrined in law, the focus is said to be solely on compromise.

Schneeberger's poor reputation among staff persists, as the latest survey by the Federal Personnel Office shows. Dissatisfaction with the «highest leadership» at FOEN is strikingly high and has increased further over the past year.

An extended arm of politics

The FOEN was already, under Albert Rösti, who took over management in early 2023, strongly oriented toward aligning expert knowledge with political positions rather than providing politics with objective expertise. It is therefore easy for his team to continue this dubious tendency. The embellishment of the biodiversity report suggests they are prepared to do so.

The Federal Office for the Environment is gradually abandoning its role as a scientifically grounded center of expertise. It risks becoming an extended arm of politics — a kind of embellishment or propaganda agency. This must be taken seriously, as the necessary foundations for informed decisions based on the best available knowledge are being lost.

And valuable time is also being lost. While the administration and the Federal Council pretend to want to act effectively, species extinction continues to advance. The foundation of life disappears invisibly and irretrievably.