Just the Facts | Why is environmental NGO funding at risk in the EU?

In recent weeks, questions over NGO funding have once again come to the fore in the European Parliament. This debate dates back to 2017 when a draft own initiative report, spearheaded by an MEP from the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), was published. Additionally, the 2022 Qatargate scandal added political momentum to the topic. This time around, green NGOs in particular are under pressure from the EPP over their funding pipeline, the LIFE Programme. Conservatives are accusing environmental NGOs of a lack of transparency under the LIFE programme and aim to crack down on the use of European Commission funds for advocacy activities in the institution. The resurfacing of the NGO funding debate comes amid broader challenges facing civil society, such as the freezing of USAID in addition to announcements of aid cuts by some major European donors, internal backlash over the future of the green agenda and growing polarisation among MEPs. This Just the Facts delves into the LIFE programme and the fight for NGO funding.  

What is an NGO? 

NGOs or non-governmental organisations are not-for-profit groups that seek to address social and political issues, either on a community, national or international basis. NGOs are essential actors in representing and advocating on behalf of citizens across a range of civil society issues. NGOs fall under the category of civil society organisations (CSO). At an EU level, many CSOs are a mediator between public authorities and citizens with a view of ensuring better design and implementation of EU initiatives and policies. The importance of protecting and maintaining civil society engagement is outlined in the European Pillar of Social Rights and is a legal requirement under EU Treaties and the Aarhus Convention. 

What are the positions of the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs)? 

On 22 January 2025, the European Parliament held a debate, titled EU financing through the LIFE programme of entities lobbying EU institutions and the need for transparency. The debate was submitted by joint request from the centre-right EPP and the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR). During the plenary debate, both parties accused the Commission (specifically the Directorate-General for the Environment) of funding environmental NGOs to advocate on their behalf. It was claimed that LIFE Programme contracts instructed NGOs to lobby MEPs and other Commission Directorates in favour of the Commission’s environmental agenda. The LIFE Programme is the EU’s funding instrument for the environment and climate action through which NGOs can apply for operating grants. German MEP, Monika Hohlmeier, the Vice-Chair of the Committee on Budgets and the EPP spokesperson for the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) led the debate claiming that LIFE grants allowed for the “manipulation” of EU funds, while other EPP members claimed that the LIFE programme functioned as a “shadow lobby” financing system and allowed environmental NGOs to operate as the Commission’s “armed wing”. Specific green policies such as the Nature Restoration Law and the Green Deal were cited as being unduly influenced by NGOs who received LIFE funding. 

In response, MEPs from the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), the Greens/EFA and Renew Europe refuted the plenary claims and pointed to the hypocrisy of the scrutiny of NGOs, asserting that the trade and large corporation lobbyists dominate Brussels. In most recent developments, on 5 March 2025, EPP MEP, Niclas Herbst, the Chair of the CONT committee, addressed a letter (obtained by POLITICO) to the Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud and Public Administration, Piotr Serafin. The letter stated that members of the CONT committee requested to examine 28 grant contracts between the Commission and a range of grant recipients, including 10 LIFE funding recipients. Additionally, the probe extends to multinationals such as Shell, Volkswagen and trade association BusinessEurope after MEPs from the centre left and the left insisted that all instances of funding from the Commission should be included in the probe.

On 31 March 2025, the European People’s Party (EPP) and the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) submitted a new motion in the Committee on Environment, Food Safety and Public Health that further objected to LIFE Programme funding. In a twist, the EPP and ECR had agreed to drop the motion objecting to the LIFE Programme in exchange for a pre-agreed statement to be read by the Commission representative on the matter. While a representative from the Commission did read out a statement during the committee meeting, a mystified Sander Smit, EPP MEP who submitted the motion, told the committee that, “There were negotiations. We did not get the full statement as we agreed from the Commission”. Thus, the vote went ahead. However, the motion failed by one vote, and with three EPP MEPs voting against their EPP colleagues, namely Radan Kanev, Ingeborg Ter Laak and Dimitris Tsiodras, it raises questions over the appetite to move forward with this charge.

What are the positions of NGOs? 

Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), one of Europe’s lobbying watchdogs, denounced the allegations against NGOs as “thick with spin” in a report issued after January’s plenary debate, in what they have previously described as a long-standing campaign by conservatives to silence NGOs. CEO additionally called on EPP MEP Monika Hohlmeier to declare a conflict of interest on leading this debate due to her position on the supervisory board of BayWa AG, the largest agricultural trader in Germany, which has received €6.5 million in funding from the LIFE Programme. Europe’s largest network of environmental citizens’ organisations, the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), reacted to the plenary, calling out “misinformation” on NGO funding, saying that “the real scandal for Europe lies in the growing calls to shrink civic space.” At the same time, civil society groups have reiterated their commitment to the transparent and effective use of EU funds, while underlining the vital contribution of NGOs to the development and implementation of EU policies.  

Prior to the plenary debate in January 2025, in November 2024, over 30 NGOs received a letter from the Commission telling them that they could no longer use LIFE funding for lobbying and advocacy activities due to updated guidelines on EU funding. Budget Commissioner Piotr Serafin justified the move by saying that the EU is “not against NGOs” but wants to prevent them from advocating “against specific institutions”. At the time, Director of Civil Society Europe Carlotta Besozzi, argued that the revised guidelines were a move to appease scrutiny from the European Parliament, ongoing since 2017.  

The lobbying landscape in the EU 

The EU Transparency Register covers all entities which engage in “all activities (…) carried out with the objective of directly or indirectly influencing the formulation or implementation of policy and the decision-making processes of the EU institutions”.   

According to Lobby Facts, who analyse data from the EU Transparency Register to track lobbyists and their influence at the EU level over time, as of March 2025, the top spending private sector lobby groups have accumulated over €83 million in lobby spending in Europe across all policy areas since 2012. This cohort comprises or represents large banks, corporations, insurance and investment companies to name a few, as well as notable tech companies such as Meta, Microsoft and Apple. In comparison, of the registered NGO lobby groups, as of March 2025, their spending totals just over €25 million cumulatively across all issues since 2012. 

In December 2024, the Green10, a coalition of ten of the largest environmental organisations and networks active at EU level sent a letter to the Commission reaffirming that the purpose of operating grants is to “level the playing field” inside Europe’s sphere of influence. According to data from the EU Transparency Register, only a third of interests represented in the EU do not represent commercial interests, while the remaining two thirds promote their own interests, the collective interests of their members or advance the interests of their clients. 

The LIFE Regulation 

The LIFE Regulation is the legal basis for environmental and climate organisations receiving grants through the LIFE Programme. The practice of the Commission providing financial support to NGOs who then use it for their campaigns is not something that takes place behind closed doors or in a secretive manner. On the contrary, the EU’s commitment to funding civil society is embedded in EU treaties, regulations and budgetary frameworks and aims to make effective the principle of political equality and the right to participate in the democratic life of the EU, enshrined in the TFEU and TEU. Environmental NGOs can apply to receive up to €700,000 per year from the LIFE funding mechanism across all activities. The LIFE 2021-2027 programme has been allocated a fund of €5.4 billion, an increase of €2 billion from the previous period (representing approximately 0.3% of the EU’s budget). The Budget Commissioner, Piotr Serafin, addressed the lobbying accusations brought forward by certain MEPs on behalf of the Commission, clarifying during the debate, “…if our [the Commission] guidance is to be followed, you will not find contracts like those we are discussing today [where NGOs are allegedly instructed to lobby on the Commission’s behalf], either in the LIFE programme nor in any other programme.”  

In a fact check conducted by POLITICO in February 2025, it was confirmed that there was no evidence to support the claim that the Commission directly instructed NGOs to lobby on its behalf.

The report by European Court of Auditors (ECA) April 2025

On the 7 April 2025, the EU Court of Auditors (ECA) published their report on the transparency of NGO funding as scheduled in their 2025 workplan. The ECA looked at EU funding awarded to 90 NGOs over 2021-2023, worth over €7 billion. The report concluded that there was no misuse of funds at all, including undue lobbying activities by NGOs.

In a joint letter, a number of NGOs responded to some of the false claims around NGO recipients of LIFE funding and outlined the important role that civil society organisations play in democratic processes.

NGOs also defended the facts following some misleading commentary on the report’s findings, including from select MEPs and right-wing think tanks, spinning the ECA findings in their favour. The real criticism of the report lies with the Commission’s Financial Transparency System, an area needing substantial improvement. It is additionally worth noting that Laima Andrikienė, former EPP lawmaker oversaw the ECA report.

Why LIFE and why now? 

As mentioned above, the debate regarding NGO funding has been ongoing on the EU level for almost a decade and is an issue which, at times, has united the centre-right and far-right. However, the issue’s fresh impetus is due to several factors. Against the backdrop of the European Commission’s “simpler and faster Europe”, deregulation is set to roll back on green rules, much to the dismay of NGOs not to mention internal backlash unfolding at the highest level in the EU Executive. COE report that President Ursula von der Leyen’s deregulation agenda was heavily inspired by corporate lobbying campaigns. Meanwhile, Civil Society Europe have said they would welcome a debate on measuring the influence of corporate lobbying, while Renew MEP Martin Hojsík reiterated the hypocrisy in recent debates, asking the question, “why do we single out environmental NGOs?”  

The anti-green agenda in Europe has undoubtedly been further emboldened by President Trump’s return to the White House. President Trump’s decision to freeze the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), where over half of USAID programmes are implemented by NGOs, has already had a significant preliminary impact on the ability of NGOs to continue functioning.  

NGOs are operating in an increasingly challenging context, with the growing ideological polarisation in the European Parliament and a changing EU landscape, following the gains of the far-right across Europe in recent national elections. Incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has called for investigations on NGO funding in his own country. Meanwhile, Hungary has followed suit in Brussels, and Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Fico, has vowed an end to the era of so-called “NGO supremacy”. Additionally, the growing threat of misinformation globally has a major impact on NGOs and according to the Edelman Trust Barometer, global trust in NGOs has declined since 2024. 

European Movement Ireland’s recent policy briefing, published in March 2025, examines the vilification of civil society, often linked to broader disinformation narratives, and explores the growing issue of shrinking civic space across the EU.