Tag: environment

  • FATTI: Does Malta protect about one-third of its seas?

    FATTI: Does Malta protect about one-third of its seas?

    Malta has binding commitments to protect a portion of its sea waters, and international sources indicate that these commitments have not been adequately fulfilled. Meanwhile, listening to ministers’ and authorities’ repeated statements on the matter creates an impression that Malta’s marine protection coverage is impressive.

    The EU’s Biodiversity Strategy contains a target of protecting 30% of the EU’s seas. Officials say that Malta is currently protecting about a third of its waters. International sources show much lower numbers, under 10%.

    What’s behind the discrepancy?

    In a recent statement at an international event, Environment Minister Miriam Dalli said that “Malta protects more than 30% of its maritime zone, through Natura 2000 sites, scientific monitoring, and a €2 million conservation programme.” 

    The Environment & Resources Authority (ERA) also made claims in 2021 that it “designated over 35% of Malta’s waters as Marine Protected Areas.” Ambjent Malta, a government department, also cites the same figure.

    In June, Alicia Bugeja Said, Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Animal Rights, referenced the over 30% figure of the Fisheries Management Zone as protected areas in a speech.

    Minister Miriam Dalli. Photo credit: DOI

    Meanwhile, the EU’s Biodiversity Information System for Europe (BISE) states that only 5.5% of Malta’s marine waters are covered by protected areas.

    The same figure appears on a dashboard managed by the EU’s Joint Research Centre. The UN Environment Programme’s Protected Planet website uses yet another figure: 7.83%. The same figure is used by the Marine Conservation Institute.

    This major discrepancy can make it confusing to understand whether Malta is on track with its marine protection targets.

    Although the government and international sources roughly agree on the size of Malta’s protected areas, they divide this figure by different reference areas. In mathematical terms, they use different denominators. The smaller the denominator (the territory by which the protected area’s size is divided), the larger the result of the division will be.

    How does Malta protect its sea?

    Marine territory can be protected under the Natura 2000 and/or national frameworks. The BISE website shows that the two largely overlap.

    The designated territories aim to protect specific habitats and species. Natura 2000 sites are not nature reserves – human activities like fishing or tourism are allowed, as long as protected species remain in good condition.

    Protection coverage of what, exactly?

    In her recent statement, Minister Dalli quoted an audit that said that more than 30% of Malta’s ‘maritime zone’ is protected.

    Both Ambjent Malta and ERA use the Fisheries Management Zone (FMZ) as the denominator.

    The EU’s Marine Strategy Framework Directive defines a country’s marine waters as coastal waters and “waters, the seabed and subsoil on the seaward side of the baseline from which the extent of territorial waters is measured extending to the outmost reach of the area where a Member State has and/or exercises jurisdictional rights, in accordance with the Unclos [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea]”.

    This UN convention provides the following definitions:

    • Territorial sea – up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, making it the smallest unit;
    • Contiguous zone – up to 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured;
    • Exclusive economic zone, adjacent to the territorial sea – up to 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.
    Explanation of the different zones by the US government. Source: US NOAA

    The convention further defines that in the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has jurisdiction with regard to the protection and preservation of the marine environment.

    Malta’s environmental jurisdiction in this zone is confirmed by the Exclusive Economic Zone Act. The UN’s Protected Planet website, the Marine Conservation Institute and the Marine Regions website consider that Malta’s exclusive economic zone is just under 53,000 km², but EU websites state it is over 75,000km².  

    ERA’s spokesperson questions the use of exclusive economic zone for these calculations. “The [EU-wide] assessments citing 5.5% follow a much broader definition of “marine waters”, which makes the extensive Maltese MPA [marine protected areas] network look far smaller in percentage terms,” the spokesperson explained in response to Amphora’s questions.

    Only three EU countries have reached the target. Source: BISE

    In a research paper, the University of Malta’s marine geologist Aaron Micallef has called Malta’s large continental shelf, which is the size of the exclusive economic zone, “Malta’s largest single natural resource”.

    However, when it comes to calculating the extent of protection, he shares ERA’s view. “For the purpose of evaluating national protection targets under strategies like the EU Biodiversity Strategy or the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the FMZ-based denominator is likely more appropriate, because it reflects Malta’s actual capacity and legal mandate to implement conservation measures,” he said.

    The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is a UN framework. It sets a target to “Conserve 30% of Land, Waters and Seas”. Here, countries submit their own targets, and Malta’s target reflects the language of Malta’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan to 2030:

    “By 2030, 30% of Maltese land and 30% of the Maltese Fisheries Management Zone (FMZ) are legally protected and form part of the comprehensive and ecologically representative National Ecological Network.”

    In comparison, Croatia sets the target as “By 2030, protect 30% of marine areas under national jurisdiction.” The Spanish target mentions alignment with EU strategies and aims to protect 30% of the country’s marine surface. Italy speaks of “marine area under Italian jurisdiction” and France speaks of “maritime areas”.

    Ireland, which also has a large marine area, has the lowest protection coverage in the EU, and Malta is third-worst performer.

    What is the protected area?

    Government sources state that the area of the “FMZ is approximately 11,480 km²”. Malta has managed this extended fisheries zone, measured at 25 nautical miles outwards, since 1971. This is larger than the contiguous zone, but much smaller than the exclusive economic zone.

    Malta’s exclusive economic zone can extend to the size of its continental shelf. Source: Continental Shelf Department

    Legislation allows the government to designate an exclusive economic zone that coincides with the continental shelf, which is of similar size to the area used by the EU.

    An EU dashboard, which also uses the 5.5% protected area coverage figure, specifies that the figures are provided to the European Environmental Agency by member states. This suggests Malta must and does submit the larger reference figure when reporting progress towards the EU’s 30% target.

    Why is the Fisheries Management Zone area used locally?

    One clue comes from a 2024 strategy document, which states that “Most of the laws of Malta currently only apply up to the territorial waters and therefore it is necessary to extend the applicability of certain laws to exclusive economic zone areas or environment protection areas”.

    “The 35% figure is misleading if it’s meant to represent Malta’s total marine jurisdiction. The fisheries management zone is only a part of Malta’s seas,” says Jacob Armstrong, ocean policy manager at the World Wildlife Fund for Nature’s European Policy Office. 

    A spokesperson of the European Environmental Agency confirmed to Amphora Media that the area reported by Malta to the European Commission under various legal frameworks aimed at protecting Europe’s seas is indeed 75,715 km2 – the largest of the figures used, which is up to “200 NM [nautical miles] from the coast,” the spokesperson explained, which confirms that Malta uses this figure for EU frameworks.

    Source: European Atlas of the Seas

    Data shows that some protected areas are criss-crossed by intensive vessel traffic, and environmental stress is likely despite protection. Protected habitats experience pressures from fishing, pollution and water sports activities. This is allowed in Natura 2000 sites, but must be monitored and managed.

    Where Malta is free to choose the denominator, the extent of its marine protection coverage is correct. Malta uses FMZ coverage nationally and internationally, where it can formulate its own targets. However, this is somewhat arbitrary.

    But for international accountability purposes,  Malta’s “over 30% protected seas” claim is misleading.

    By international standards, the figure is under 10%, and we did not find another European Mediterranean country calculating its protection coverage with a fisheries management zone or contiguous zone (similar size) as a denominator.

    The FMZ is slightly larger than the contiguous zone and much smaller than the exclusive economic zone. It is a large area in comparison to Malta’s land mass, but it is not the area to consider when tracking Malta’s progress towards EU targets.

    Since this portion of the Mediterranean Sea is assigned to Malta, no other country will step in to ensure protection. If Malta does not step up, it will leave gaps in Mediterranean protection coverage.

    Flaunting the “more than 30%” figure, when the EU target is 30%, makes it look like Malta has already exceeded its EU commitment. However, according to international standards for calculating protected area coverage, Malta is far from fulfilling its commitment.

    In this context specifically, the use of this figure to claim that Malta protects a large part of its seas is misleading.

    This project is supported by the European Media and Information Fund. The sole responsibility for any content supported by the European Media and Information Fund lies with the authors and it may not necessarily reflect the positions of the EMIF and the Fund Partners, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and the European University Institute.

  • FATTI: Is Malta Leading The Way On Climate Change Action And Adaptation?

    FATTI: Is Malta Leading The Way On Climate Change Action And Adaptation?

    Climate change, adaptation and resilience are key government priorities—or at least, that’s what Malta’s politicians claim. But even the National Audit Office, in a damning June report, found that measures to address it lacked clear ownership, timeframes, monitoring, and evaluation.

    Still, that hasn’t stopped Malta’s politicians—whether in government or opposition—from making bold claims about their ability or intent to tackle the climate crisis, with Malta’s parliament even unanimously declaring a climate emergency in 2019. 

    But have the words translated to long-term, sustained action? Our latest FATTI looks at the details. 

    In a recent press release, the Climate Action Authority (CAA), launched in October 2024, said that “Malta [was] at the forefront of planning for climate change adaptation”.

    The authority claimed that it was “the first of its kind in the European Union” and was working on an important plan, without providing any further details.

    “In the coming weeks, meetings are also scheduled with social partners and civil society to create a realistic, inclusive, and feasible plan,” the statement continued before concluding:

    “Malta is sending a clear message: climate resilience is a national priority.”

    The Climate Action Authority (CAA) was launched with the promise of implementing a legal framework that would evaluate local policies related to climate-friendliness.

    That year, the Climate Action Act was also adopted. It outlines the functions of the CAA, including the requirement “to ensure that all policy and legislation directly affecting climate change is reviewed in consultation with the Authority. The CAA can independently impose administrative penalties but not pass laws itself.

    However, strategies and plans to address the climate crisis are not a new development. Malta adopted its first Climate Change Adaptation Strategy in 2012, while the Climate Act was introduced in 2015 and later reformed in 2024 to establish the CAA.

    Minister Miriam Dalli. Photo credit: DOI

    Malta, meanwhile, has agreed to the EU’s Green Deal. However, Finance Minister Clyde Caruana has said that he is sceptical of the ability of member states, including Malta, to reach said targets.

    In its first report on climate policies, including CAA, the National Audit Office noted that “infrastructural and greening projects with adaptation-related benefits were generally not being supplemented with climate proofing assessments”. 

    The Climate Action Act requires that within each ministry, the permanent secretary acts as a climate action coordinator and submits inputs to the CAA. However, this law does not establish emissions reduction targets.

    The CAA has been assigned to implement the EU’s Emissions Trading System, which allocates emissions allowances to polluting companies, allowing them to trade on the carbon market, including through auctions.

    Its performance according to the Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) is low. Malta is ranked 34th out of 63 countries, while the implementation of climate policies is considered “poor”.

    The government’s own Research Innovation Unit agrees: “Malta’s slow progress can be attributed to a combination of economic factors, fragmented climate governance, and the underutilisation of the Research Innovation Unit (RIU)”. The unit’s expert insights have remained underused by the central government.

    Climate Action Authority’s CEO Abigail Cutajar. Photo credit: DOI

    Meanwhile, the “ambitious” and “pioneering” solar and offshore wind plans described by  Minister Miriam Dalli and the Energy and Water Agency remain at the planning stage. A tender has been issued and is still open.

    “While the government is congratulating itself on setting up a novel Climate Action Authority, we continue seeing inaction on climate change. A cross-sectoral authority on climate change is an excellent idea – but only if it has real power and the political will backing it, and has the mandate to assess and advise on proposed projects on the basis of their climate impacts,” Friends of the Earth Malta, an environmental organisation, wrote in a statement.

    In the 2025 budget speech, the finance minister also promised “Carbon-free economy by 2050”, which is impossible as production and life itself create carbon emissions, so most policymakers use the term ‘carbon neutral’ instead to mean that the carbon emitted is balanced with the carbon absorbed.

    Miriam Dalli’s recent visit to CAA. Photo credit: DOI

    Malta has made some progress in reducing emissions, largely due to the switch from fuel oil to liquified natural gas for energy generation and the construction of an electricity interconnector.

    Still, between mid-2023 and mid-2024, Malta recorded the fastest-growing emissions in the EU. Growth has since slowed and is now below the EU average, but emissions are still rising.

    Meanwhile, despite a temporary dip during the pandemic, transport emissions are growing substantially and are on track to overtake energy generation emissions.

    The government has decided to replace the expansion of an electric bus fleet with providing more grants for individuals and companies to purchase electric vehicles. CAA did not reply to questions about whether it was consulted about this.

    Malta Public Transport Buses

    Waste also contributes significantly, and households continue to burn diesel and gas for heating and cooling.

    Despite this, Malta remains somewhat unambitious in its climate commitments. While the EU has committed to a 40% emissions reduction by 2030 under the Effort Sharing Regulation, Malta negotiated a commitment to only 19%. The government considers even that too ambitious and wants to avoid it.

    The RIU, the government’s research arm, says that “Malta’s current approach misses the potential of a bottom-up strategy, where local councils and specialised units like the RIU are empowered to act. Local councils, when provided with the right resources, could implement inter-alia: pedestrianisation initiatives, low-emission zones, and urban greening projects—addressing key issues like overdevelopment and car dependence.”

    Malta has also committed to achieving only 10% share of renewable energy by 2020, but the expected renewable energy share in 2030 is below EU target. Malta’s share is the third-lowest in the EU, lagging behind Cyprus among others.

    Malta’s latest strategy outlines measures like EV grants, more charging stations, shore-to-ship power, and free public transport.

    However, it tracks investments and user numbers without measuring reductions in fossil-fuel use or car dependency. Experts told the CCPI that these initiatives often add to, rather than replace, fossil-fuelled trips.

    Questions about how CAA spends the Climate Action Fund were ignored. Neither Transport ministry’s spokesperson nor permanent secretary Bjorn Callus did not reply to Amphora’s questions about any inputs exchanged with CAA on transport policy.

    Contrary to political statements, Malta is a laggard, not a leader, in the climate transition, with unambitious goals and a lack of vision for transformation.

    Amphora Media has not found any evidence that establishing the Climate Action Authority has introduced more ambition or more accountability in climate policymaking.

    There is no proof that establishing a government entity or drafting more plans counts as “punching above its weight”, as its CEO claimed, or being at the “forefront”.

    An analysis of policies in key areas confirms the National Audit Office’s insights that ownership, timeframes, monitoring and evaluation are lacking.

    In other words, wishlists are abundant, but nobody takes on the task of assigning tasks and determining how their success will be measured.

    Due to EU commitments and thanks to its funding, Malta is taking some moderate, unambitious steps towards reducing its impact on the climate, and there is no evidence that climate is treated as an emergency when it comes to concrete action.

    In this context, political claims that Malta prioritises climate mitigation or leads the way are false.

    This project is supported by the European Media and Information Fund. The sole responsibility for any content supported by the European Media and Information Fund lies with the authors and it may not necessarily reflect the positions of the EMIF and the Fund Partners, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and the European University Institute.

  • Analysis: Is Burning Waste At Magħtab The Only Way Out Of Malta’s Waste Crisis?

    Analysis: Is Burning Waste At Magħtab The Only Way Out Of Malta’s Waste Crisis?

    By Daiva Repečkaitė

    Wax paper from your sandwich. Delivery containers. Wet wipes. Frayed, low-quality leggings from a fast-fashion app. Many daily-use items become waste that cannot be recycled. The proposed solution: a waste-to-energy facility at Magħtab.

    But is it the most effective way out of the country’s waste crisis? An analysis of available waste treatment solutions shows that all of them have limitations.

    Will it absolve Malta of recycling obligations?

    Landfilling, which means dumping waste in the ground, is Malta’s most common but costliest waste management method given the country’s space limitations. 

    Malta is under pressure from the EU to reduce landfilling of waste. The country relies on waste export, so the plan for new facilities also aims to increase the country’s self-sufficiency.

    In addition to the energy-generating plant, a thermal treatment facility (which ‘cooks’ waste at high temperatures to undo its hazardous properties) is planned within the same complex, replacing the one currently operating in Marsa. The two facilities are different and serve separate waste streams.

    Then-Minister Jose Herrera announced plans for a waste-to-energy facility at a press conference in 2017. Source: DOI

    In a 2018 technical report, then-Minister for the Environment Jose Herrera called the government’s commitment to setting up a waste incinerator a “bold” decision. 

    “This was an environmentally responsible decision and will not affect our ambitious objectives to increase our recycling efforts in order to meet the 2030 recycling targets,” he stated in the foreword. The report noted that UK islands, such as the Isle of Wight and the Isle of Man, had waste-to-energy facilities.

    A 2016 study found that exporting waste to other EU countries for processing would cost tens of millions of euros every year.

    The incinerator plan faces criticism. For example, in a public consultation, Friends of the Earth and Moviment Graffitti wrote that “building a Waste to Energy Plant was in no way a ‘green’ solution”.

    “A lot of people will think of the incinerator as a quick solution. It’s not, it requires a lot of planning, a lot of money,” says Dr Margaret Camilleri Fenech, who researches waste management at the University of Malta.

    She warns of the so-called rebound effect – people waste more when they know that mitigation measures are in place.

    “I am scared that we’ll shift into that [mindset], but we still have recycling targets to respect, which we’ve never managed to anyway,” she says, adding that Malta will not likely to be able to use the incinerator to dig up old landfilled waste and clean up former landfilling sites, because it is mixed with construction waste.

    “We have a high level of construction waste, for example. Obviously, we cannot burn it. And our organic fraction has a lot of food waste. There’s a lot of water content, so obviously you need to dry it up to burn, and we still need to respect the recycling target of the EU,” she says.

    Insufficient capacity to prepare waste for recycling

    Malta ships its waste to various countries. Figures from Eurostat, the EU statistical agency show that Malta shipped over 14,000 tonnes of paper and cardboard to India, over 1,200 tonnes of plastic to Türkiye, and over 1,200 tonnes of synthetic waste textiles to the United Arab Emirates. Data shows that some of Malta’s waste is already burned for energy, but again, abroad.

    Source: NSO

    The probability of recycling recyclable materials, such as plastic, depends on how clean they are when they arrive at the point of waste separation. A 2021 audit reveals that focusing on plastic is crucial. In Malta’s case, plastic destined for recycling is not clean at all.

    The audit found that “Malta lacks the infrastructural capacity to engage in more comprehensive and sustainable waste management” and that, at the time, only around a tenth of all plastic collected was being recycled, while two-thirds were landfilled locally.

    It further explained that incineration (burning) with energy recovery would be preferred to landfilling when it comes to dealing with plastics rejected for recycling and plastics that residents and businesses threw into the mixed waste bags – these were not separated and considered for recycling “due to the non-availability of operational capacity”.

    New schemes will divert some waste

    In 2023, waste separation became an obligation for individuals, companies and the government, subject to penalties.

    Differentiated gate fees for disposing of waste at specific sites also discourage the delivery of mixed waste, as this is more expensive. Incentives to bring reusable cups for drinks were supposed to be operational since 2022 but remain rare.

    In 2024, Circular Economy Malta, a government agency, introduced a scheme to encourage shops to offer discounts or other benefits to users who bring their own containers.

    The agency claims that this initiative has successfully prevented the use of 63,524 single-use containers. However, 54,966 of them (87%) were detergent containers – typically made from sturdy plastic and recyclable. Existing reuse options do not address the issues with filmy and dirty plastic, or mixed materials.

    Selected categories of waste entering the Għallis landfill. Source: NSO

    According to Friends of the Earth Malta, an environmental NGO, “The [waste management] problem has been exacerbated in recent years by the country’s growing population, the tourism boom, and the “growth at all costs” mantra.”

    “The tourism industry produces so much waste, when we look at the figures. Most of the time, we’re looking at how much money the tourism industry is bringing in. Still, we don’t look at how much waste they are producing, at how much water they’re consuming, energy, congestion, and we should balance these things out,” Waste researcher Camilleri Fenech added.

    In response to a parliamentary question in January, Environment Minister Miriam Dalli said that the waste-to-energy plant will process 40% of Malta’s non-recyclable waste and provide 4.5% of the country’s energy needs.

    Malta’s consumer and tourist economy creates a demand for easy waste solutions. Currently, dumping most waste into landfills and shipping it abroad serves as such, but this practice will be increasingly regulated and expensive. Years of explaining to people and, crucially, companies about how to do the right thing have achieved very limited results. Given Malta’s growing waste generation, the mountain of waste is being treated as one of the most reliable renewable energy sources.

  • Project Green Initiatives Cluster In Malta’s Prime Minister’s, Environment Minister’s Electoral Districts

    Project Green Initiatives Cluster In Malta’s Prime Minister’s, Environment Minister’s Electoral Districts

    By Daiva Repečkaitė

    Project Green is poised for sweeping powers under the latest Planning Authority proposal—powers NGOs warn will be largely unchecked on ODZ land and urban spaces—and an Amphora Media analysis shows that many of its current projects cluster within the electoral districts of Prime Minister Robert Abela and Environment Minister Miriam Dalli.

    Minister for the Environment, Energy and Regeneration of the Grand Harbour Miriam Dalli visits ongoing works by Project Green in Birżebbuġa. Photo credit: DOI

    According to data compiled from publicly available information, roughly half of all announced Project Green initiatives have occurred in the electoral districts where Abela and Dalli ran in the 2022 general election.

    “These projects are distributed across the country, with the active involvement of local councils and NGOs. They are based on public calls, electoral commitments, and the need for interventions. Unlike what your questions imply, it is not the case that certain areas are favoured while others are neglected,” the spokesperson of the Ministry for Environment, Energy and Public Cleanliness wrote in response to Amphora’s questions.

    ​​Project Green officially stated that it was working on 118 projects within different localities as of October 2024. However, a complete list is yet to be published. When asked by Amphora Media, Project Green provided a list of 46 projects.

    How we calculated the distribution

    Using announcements published on Project Green’s website, as well as planning applications and development notification orders submitted to the Planning Authority, Amphora Media calculated how Project Green’s projects are distributed across Malta.

    They did not overlap with the list Project Green sent, so we conducted separate analyses for each dataset.

    The dataset we have compiled by analysing announcements on Project Green’s website was the largest, as it included announcements of interim steps within the project. 

    Among the announced works, the localities within the 2nd electoral district benefited most from Project Green works. These localities are where Prime Minister Robert Abela, Parliamentary Secretary for Local Government Alison Zerafa Civelli – Abela’s sister-in-law – and Parliamentary Secretary for Public Cleanliness Glenn Bedingfield contested in the last general election. 

    It was followed by 5th district, where Environment Minister Miriam Dalli and Robert Abela ran, and the 11th district, where Dalli competed against opposition leader Bernard Grech.

    Robert Abela and Miriam Dalli at a Project Green location. Photo credit: DOI

    Project Green’s list of works carried out covered all electoral districts except Gozo. Miriam Dalli’s 5th district attracted more than one in six projects, the same as Silvio Schembri’s and Ian Borg’s 6th district. Their 7th district also emerged at the top.

    “Project Green’s efforts are executed in close collaboration and full consultation with local councils, schools, and the community at large, respectively. Project selection is a rigorous process, including applications received through various launched schemes, such as the Community Greening Grant and the Greening School Initiative, along with those mentioned in the Electoral Manifesto,” Project Green’s representative replied in response to questions about the distribution of the agency’s projects.

    What counts as green?

    Project Green, a government agency, was opened in early 2023 to respond to the growing demand for liveable localities. “We want to deliver green spaces that are self-sufficient, sustainable and accessible,” Environment Minister Miriam Dalli said at the agency’s launch. 

    “The Government has committed to launching the largest-ever investment in green and public open spaces, with various entities involved. Project Green serves as the primary leader in this initiative,” the ministry spokesperson emphasised in response to Amphora’s questions.

    More than four in five Maltese want the government to tackle climate change. In a 2024 survey, nearly all Maltese respondents said they suffered from extreme weather events, and two in five wanted tree-lined streets or green spaces to cool urban spaces down. A survey of children and adolescents showed that most wanted more safety from traffic in their localities.

    However, as the Project Green agency builds more playgrounds and car parks, it is unclear how its mission differs from other government schemes for similar purposes.

    Project Green has placed furniture in a ‘green pocket’ between roads in Qajjenza. Photo credit: DOI

    Analysis by Amphora Media shows that Project Green has submitted 19 planning applications – four concern creating car parks, and six include playgrounds or play areas. One of them, in Hamrun, was withdrawn and submitted as a development notification order.

    Project Green also submitted 18 development notification orders during that time (one was withdrawn and resubmitted) – one includes car park development and seven contain playground or play area developments.

    In total, nearly a fifth of the planning applications and development notices were filed in the 5th electoral district, where Minister Miriam Dalli & Prime Minister Robert Abela contested in 2022. No other electoral district came close. 

    Regarding localities, Birzebbuga is the largest beneficiary, with three Project Green developments. Attard also got three, but two concentrated on San Anton gardens.

    Critics consider that some interventions by Project Green should not be considered green projects, meaning that instead of nature-based solutions, the agency promotes high-maintenance landscaped gardens, which depend on constant contractor input.

    Project Green’s plans to plant trees on top of a car park in Bormla. Source: documents submitted to the Planning Authority

    On Project Green’s plans to build underground parking topped a garden in Bormla, Alfred E. Baldacchino, former assistant director of what used to be the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, who blogs and writes about environmental policy and planning, said, “This is a pseudo-green project, because trees are going to be planted on the roof of the construction, and that is no natural habitat for trees”. Drawings submitted to the Planning Authority show that trees will have, at most, 1.2 metres of depth of soil for their roots.  

    “The selection of tree species for the project was carried out by Project Green’s Research & Development Unit, which includes environmental scientists,” a representative of Project Green said in response to this criticism.

    Regulating interventions

    The Bormla site is one of the 13 developments where Project Green wants to install playgrounds, outdoor fitness equipment or other similar facilities. 

    Floriana’s Pinetum is another, with plans for “general cleanup of the pinetum, tree pruning, accessibility improvement, public amenities, general lighting, fencing, Nissen Huts restoration and installation of children’s play area”.

    Developments like outdoor fitness areas are already financed by the Capital Projects financing scheme under the Ministry for the National Heritage, the Arts and Local Government. A new outdoor fitness area in a public garden under this scheme was recently unveiled in Marsaxlokk. Urban greening projects are also implemented by the waste management entity, WasteServ, among others has also implemented urban greening projects.

    Ambjent Malta is one of the agencies investing in green urban spaces. Photo credit: DOI

    Various parks, green walls and green areas are covered by a tender, awarded to GEB Landscaping. San Anton gardens, for example, have over the past years been landscaped both by GEB Landscaping and by Project Green.

    “The scope of Project Green differs significantly and does not overlap with the efforts of the GEB.  It is to be highlighted that, whilst [Ministry for Environment, Energy and Public Cleanliness] is the lead ministry, it is not the only one delivering public open spaces. It is a Government commitment to fulfil this promise,” the ministry spokesperson said in response to the questions about potential overlaps.

    A consultation that concluded in March presented a proposed legal amendment that would give Project Green more powers. If adopted, Project Green would implement such measures and approve them when submitted by other entities.

    “Under this proposal, Project Green and other entities would be granted unchecked power to build in Outside Development Zones (ODZ) and urban areas through a backdoor mechanism that bypasses established planning policies. This is unacceptable and must be stopped,” a group of ten Maltese NGOs, including Moviment Graffitti and Din l-Art Ħelwa, wrote in a public statement.

    “[The proposed change] applies to projects that are not only to be done by Project Green, [but] all public entities, local councils – they are cited in the legal notice, they can do a project without going through the normal planning process that they should be going through usually, if this is under the label of a greening project,” explains Andre Callus, an activist at the NGO Moviment Graffitti, which opposes the changes.

    Applicants “would just need the approval of Project Green, no consultation, no possibility for the public to object or appeal,” Callus continued. Project Green’s representative responded, saying, “The amendments to the [Development Notification Order] will foster coordination and cohesion between Project Green and all entities involved.”

    Project Green’s landscaped area. Photo credit: DOI

    Controversial leadership

    Project Green has become primarily associated with public gardens. In 2023-2024, it issued numerous tenders, with its top contractors being garden supply, furniture, drilling and quarrying, and boat maintenance. 

    It also issued €277,373 worth of direct orders, with the largest recipient being Agriproducts Ltd, trading as Jardinland – and €150,801 worth of calls for quotations.

    “The direct order to Agriproducts Ltd was issued as the existing framework was fully utilised. Following market research, their quote was the lowest among the four received. The normal approval process was adhered to,” Project Green’s spokesperson responded to a question why they decided to go with a direct order rather than the usual tendering process.

    The agency came to additional spotlight when Joseph Cuschieri became its CEO. In 2020, Cuschieri suspended himself and then resigned from his MFSA post after a Times of Malta report disclosed that he had accepted a luxury holiday in Las Vegas in 2018, sponsored by Yorgen Fenech, who currently awaits trial for the alleged involvement in the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia. 

    Joseph Cuschieri. Photo credit: DOI

    An internal review board, led by former Chief Justice Joseph Azzopardi and lawyer Mark Simiana, determined that Cuschieri had infringed the MFSA’s guidelines on hospitality.

    Prime Minister Robert Abela insisted that Cuschieri paid a price for his wrongdoing and had the necessary credentials to head Project Green.

    Cuschieri had also courted controversy during his time at the MFSA over an early retirement scheme that omitted the standard obligation for its beneficiaries to retire fully, with some going on to take on other public sector jobs, according to the Shift News.

    According to tribunal records, Cuschieri admitted to having spoken with a minister about employing a former MFSA employee who had taken early retirement, raising concerns about informal rehiring practices. The Shift News has revealed that Cuschieri headhunted 19 new managers to Project Green. 

    According to the budget documents of 2025, Project Green’s expenditure ballooned three times between 2023 and 2024. The agency spent €391,261 on upgrading parks and public gardens in 2023, plus nearly €7 million on urban greening. But by 2024 urban greening expenditure rose to €23.5 million, and €30 million were earmarked for 2025.

    Sabrina Zammit and Justin Schembri contributed research.