Tag: environment

  • Fatti: Do Traditional Maltese Hobbies Need Protection From Environmental Legislation?

    Fatti: Do Traditional Maltese Hobbies Need Protection From Environmental Legislation?

    • The ruling Labour Party (PL) promised constitutional protection for traditional hobbies after the Nationalist Party (PN) proposed a constitutional right to a clean and sustainable environment.
    • Constitutional protections against environmental crimes are non-enforceable in court, and penalties are mild. 
    • Malta already has legal tools to protect traditions under UNESCO’s Convention and the Cultural Heritage Act, but hunting, trapping, fireworks and shooting are not listed as intangible heritage.
    • Many traditional Maltese pastimes rely on open spaces, from fireworks and hunting to village feasts, meaning both environmental degradation and overdevelopment threaten them more directly than environmental laws do.
    • Any Maltese law that breaches EU law is unconstitutional, meaning constitutional protection could not shield practices like bird trapping, which the EU Court has ruled illegal.
    • Spain legally protects traditional bullfighting, and Canada, Australia and New Zealand legally recognise traditional native hunting and fishing, but in court it is up to  defendants to prove they were practising traditional hunting or fishing.
    • The Constitutional Court’s rulings are not automatically binding, so constitutional “protection” offers little practical security for either hobbies or the environment.
    • Overall, claims that only constitutional protection can safeguard hobbies are politically convenient but legally weak.

    From hunting and fireworks to village feasts, many Maltese pastimes depend on open spaces. In the wake of the opposition Nationalist Party’s (PN) voted-down attempt to enshrine the right to live in a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, Prime Minister Robert Abela pledged constitutional safeguards for traditional hobbies, portraying his party as their only “guarantee.”

    The debate has pitted environmental protection against the preservation of tradition. But is that really the case? And has “constitutional protection” become a buzzword that means little in practice?

    On 12th October, Prime Minister Robert Abela promised constitutional protections for traditional hobbies and said that the Labour Party is the only guarantee for amateurs and hobbyists. 

    He did so in reaction to the opposition’s motion to enshrine a right to a clean and sustainable environment as a constitutional right.

    Abela told the Times of Malta that this proposal was “contrary to what others tried to do, who attempted to take away that protection and deprive [hobbyists] of their pastime.”

    Prime Minister Robert Abela. Photo credit: DOI

    Abela also said that he would offer constitutional safeguards to ‘all traditions’, including hunting and trapping during a limited season.

    “We know the challenges hunting and trapping face locally and in Europe. But traditions like fireworks, feasts, and sports, sometimes taken for granted,” are now at risk, Labour Party MEP Alex Agius Saliba said.

    Alex Agius Saliba
    Alex Agius Saliba. Photo credit: European Parliament

    “Will this give me, as a citizen, the right to play hopscotch out in the streets, as we used to in the past?” Birdlife Malta’s Darryl Grima told the Malta Independent.

    A green paper published by the government after the PN’s the proposal claimed “Safeguarding the environment is a national priority” and that “the country’s commitment to environmental protection is demonstrated through a robust framework of constitutional provisions and international legal agreements.”

    According to reports, Parliamentary Secretary for Reforms Rebecca Buttigieg claimed on national TV that the environment as a human right was already in the constitution, which is not the case.

    The government’s proposal and protection of tradition:

    Malta’s government is yet to present a bill regarding the constitutional protection of hobbies.

    In its 2022 electoral manifesto, the PL had a section on recreation and hobbies. It made promises for caravan, camping and picnic enthusiasts, and promised green networks for ramblers, hikers and all those who visit the Maltese countryside.” It also mentioned amateur fishing and promised safeguarding “equal and equitable” hunting and trapping in line with EU directives.

    However, several safeguards are already available.

    Malta has ratified UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. “Intangible cultural heritage” can refer to social practices, rituals and festive events, and the signatory countries are committed to “take the necessary measures to ensure the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage present in its territory”. 

    Malta’s Cultural Heritage Act defines cultural heritage as including “intangible cultural assets comprising arts, traditions, customs and skills employed in the performing arts, in applied arts and in crafts and other intangible assets which have a historical, artistic or ethnographic value”.

    According to this law, “every citizen of Malta as well as every person present in Malta shall have the duty of protecting the cultural heritage as well as the right to benefit from this cultural heritage through learning and enjoyment.”

    The state, in turn, “shall have the duty of establishing and maintaining administrative and regulatory structures of superintendence so as to ensure that this heritage is protected and conserved”.

    Malta’s inventory of intangible heritage includes the traditional village feast, falconry, sea salt harvesting and other practices, but not fireworks, hunting, trapping and shooting.

    Malta had the option to sign the Council of Europe’s Faro Convention, which defines cultural heritage and demands that “exercise of the right to cultural heritage may be subject only to those restrictions which are necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the public interest and the rights and freedoms of others.” But it did not sign it.

    It is unclear how the constitutional protection would address challenges of high population density and fragmented land.

    Speaking at a Labour Party event, Lucas Micallef, president of the National Association of Hunters and Trappers (FKNK), said, “If we do not have a natural environment to go to, if we do not have rural spaces, we cannot practice what we love so much.”

    What’s happened abroad?

    Specifically on hunting, different legal traditions exist in Europe. Polish academics have noted that falconry, for example, is “is considered to be a form of intangible heritage manifested in knowledge and practices regarding nature and the universe”, but English fox hunting with dogs is not and has been banned. 

    “The heritage cultivated by hunters should not be reduced to some open-air folk museum. It should be a living element valuable for the cultural cohesion of local communities, their connections and sensitivity to the natural environment,” the authors argued.

    Canada, Australia and New Zealand legally recognise traditional native hunting and fishing, but their criminal systems impose “burden of proof of traditional practice as a defence”.

    Spanish law protects bullfighting as heritage

    In 2013, Spain adopted a law to enshrine bullfighting as a heritage practice – the law is still in force despite a petition for the “No Es Mi Cultura” campaign to remove the protections gathering over 700,000 signatures, according to the campaign organisers.

    The law establishes that the government must guarantee Spaniards the right to practise bullfighting freely, subject to applicable regulations. Bulls used for fighting, as well as hunting dogs, are excluded under the 2023 national animal welfare law.

    PN’s proposal

    PN’s bill, presented by Darren Carabott, was debated in two parliamentary sessions. It aimed to add the environment among rights to ‘enjoy’ alongside property and the protection of the law. 

    “All persons in Malta shall have the right to live in a clean, healthy and sustainable environment,” the proposed article read.

    It specified that “a person bringing such an action shall not be required to show any personal interest” when pursuing contravening actions.

    MP Darren Carabott. Photo credit: DOI

    The Opposition’s proposal had courted significant criticism from the government and lobbyists, some of which were tabled in parliament. These included The National Band Clubs Association, The Malta Maritime Forum, FKNK, The Malta Shooting Sport Federation, and the football association. 

    Kaċċaturi San Ubertu, another hunters’ organisation, voiced its support for making the protection of the environment constitutionally enforceable, but added that “if environmental rights are to be recognised in the Constitution, then the same consideration should be given to the incorporation of the right to practice traditional and regulated hunting and trapping.”

    The opposition’s proposal was shot down in Parliament with 32 votes in favour, and 40 against. PL MPs all voted against the proposal.

    Caged finches used as live decoys. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    A right to clean, healthy and sustainable environment was promised in PN’s 2023 guidelines. The proposed bill defined environment as including “the social conditions, aesthetic coherence and cultural attributes”. 

    On hobbies, the PN’s electoral manifesto singled out “festivals, celebrations, and other manifestations”, and promised to “take all the necessary decisions not only to prevent these habits from being lost but to strengthen them.” It did not mention hunting and trapping.

    Legal protections of the environment

    Currently, Malta’s constitution states that “the State shall protect and conserve the environment and its resources for the benefit of the present and future generations and shall take measures to address any form of environmental degradation in Malta” in Declaration of principles, which are not enforceable in court.

    In comparison:

    • The Spanish constitution contains the clause that “Everyone has the right to enjoy an environment suitable for personal development”;
    • The Greek constitution enshrines a right to a natural environment;
    • The Portuguese constitution protects the right to a “healthy and ecologically balanced human living environment”;
    • The Slovak constitution establishes that “Everyone has the right to a favourable environment” and “No one may endanger, or damage the environment, natural resources, and the cultural heritage beyond the extent laid down by law”.

    In a 2022 resolution, the UN’s General Assembly recognised “the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a human right”.

    Malta has the Environment Protection Act. It stipulates that “It shall be the duty of every person and entity, whether public or private, to protect the environment” and “It shall be the duty of the Government to protect the environment for the benefit of the present and future generations”. Those provisions are not enforceable in court.

    The Crimes against the Environment Act lists several offences that include radiation, pollution, and the destruction or trading in protected species.

    If the crime does not harm humans, the punishment is set at “imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine (multa) not exceeding one thousand euro.”

    The government’s green paper acknowledges that “evolving challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and pressures on natural resources demand further strengthening of existing laws” and that “Responsible execution also entails collaboration with citizens, businesses, and eNGOs so that compliance becomes part of a shared culture of environmental responsibility.” It does not mention courts, police or environmental crime.

    Is the constitution an effective safeguard?

    When Malta joined the European Union, the European Union Act gave EU law supremacy over Maltese law. It specifies that any Maltese law conflicting with Malta’s EU obligations or with rights derived from EU law is “without effect and unenforceable.” 

    EU Law vs Malta’s Constitution 

    For Malta, bird trapping is a clear instance where traditional hobbies clash with EU law.

    According to the jurisprudence of the Maltese Constitutional Court, a law that breaches EU law is contrary to the Constitution. Last year, the Court of Justice ruled that the bird trapping derogation is in breach of EU law.

    If a right to traditional hobbies were added to the constitution, but the practice of those hobbies clashed with EU law, the constitutional ambiguity would have to be either anticipated and addressed in legislation or resolved in case law, potentially inundating the Constitutional Court.

    Manoel Island Malta

    Implementation

    Meanwhile, there are regular concerns over the applicability of constitutional court decisions in Malta to actual legislation.

    The constitution contains Chapter II, in which “The provisions […] shall not be enforceable in any court, but […] it shall be the aim of the State to apply these principles in making laws.”

    In its latest rule of law report, the European Commission highlighted that it is “up to Parliament to repeal or amend laws found unconstitutional”.

    This means that “unconstitutional laws remain valid until Parliament repeals them”.

    Police officers confiscating nets and finches. Photo credit: CABS

    If any national or EU law were to conflict with constitutional provisions, even a Constitutional Court ruling in one case would not mean that the uncertainty would be resolved for all similar cases, because “judgments of the Constitutional Court lack universal applicability.”

    As is the case in human rights cases, or even old rent laws, constitutional redress is not an effective remedy in Malta, and judgments of the Constitutional Court lack universal applicability.
    Carabott’s bill addresses these limitations by prescribing direct court intervention.

    Malta’s constitutional and legislative framework means that rulings by the Constitutional Court lack universal applicability. This weakens constitutional protection, whether for hobbies, traditional practices, or the environment.

    For example, although the Constitution already contains environmental provisions, key laws remain weak and often preclude effective litigation.

    Alarmist claims that stronger environmental protections in the Constitution would spell the end of traditional hobbies are difficult to justify, as are the claims that hobbies can only be protected by the Constitution.

    Malta has failed to use existing tools to protect certain hobbies as intangible cultural heritage, the way it has done with village feasts and falconry. Nor has it signed the relevant Council of Europe convention requiring that restrictions on traditional practices be properly justified.

    Ultimately, politicians’ assertions that constitutional safeguards are the only guarantee for hobbyists are 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: Are Bird Trappers Conducting Research?

    Fatti: Are Bird Trappers Conducting Research?

    • Malta’s 2025 trapping season has reopened under a “research derogation” allowing trappers to act as licensed researchers despite an EU court ruling that Malta failed to prove no scientific alternatives exist.
    • Malta’s latest legal notice erases the official ringing coordinator, EURING, and potentially opens up the ringing license to trappers.
    • Government claim: Trapping is “the least intrusive method” to collect data on finch migration. The FKNK defends the derogation as merging “socio-cultural tradition with research”.
    • Over 4,000 trappers have reportedly recorded only 40 ringed finches in 2020-2023, many of which were caught in Malta. EURING, Europe’s bird-ringing authority, says the data “does not meet acceptable scientific or ethical standards.”
    • Government-hired scientists called the trapping derogation results “not directly comparable” with scientific analysis.
    • Malta’s enforcement capacity has declined, the number of vehicles used for field checks has halved between 2022 and 2023, and Gozo remains poorly policed.
    • Licensed trapping areas overlap with Natura 2000 protected zones, and inspectors report vegetation clearing and habitat damage.
    • Both conservationists and independent experts, including a former Ornis Committee chair, say the derogation is a guise to legitimise traditional trapping, not a genuine scientific effort.
    • The European Commission’s infringement case remains open. Malta could face financial sanctions for failing to comply with the Court of Justice ruling.

    Malta’s 2025 trapping season is now open.This year, the government has relaxed rules on scientific bird ringing, removing references to EURING, the coordinating body of bird ringing schemes. The state insists the trapping effort is for research despite the EU Court of Justice ruling that Malta failed to prove a lack of alternatives.

    The government’s decision has split both sides of the trapping debate: the National Association of Hunters and Trappers (FKNK), the leading hunting and trapping association, Kaċċaturi San Ubertu (KSU), a smaller NGO, and conservation NGOs.

    Licensed Maltese bird ringer at work. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    “This historic step opens a new chapter in our country’s approach to bird conservation and research,” FKNK said.

    KSU’s secretary Adrian Cauchi emphasised that no formal ringing course exists in Europe, and all ringers must ultimately be allowed to operate by the government. 

    “I cannot do the [training to become a ringer] with Birdlife, because Birdlife is with EURING. EURING is not giving us a way out because it wants to abolish the traditional methods,” he told Amphora Media.

    For Birdlife Malta, this “ill-conceived plan is destined to fail. Scientific bird ringing is only credible when carried out within the EURING network, the only recognised European framework for bird ringing. Any attempt to operate outside this network will produce meaningless data and expose Malta to further ridicule and sanctions.”

    Trapping continues to court controversy, but the question is: Is trapping in Malta really all for research?

    Malta’s government began declaring research derogations for trapping in 2020.  Maltese law allows “under strictly supervised conditions and in a selective manner, a research derogation to obtain scientific data on Malta’s reference population of the seven finch species”. 

    The legal notice argues that “ornithologists  and  licensed  bird-ringers  have  been unsuccessful  in  collecting […] the required  data  to  meet  the  stated  objective  of  the  Finches Research  Project,” which is:

    “Where do finches that migrate over Malta during post-nuptial (autumn) migration come from?”

    Police spot-checks within each region are promised to be daily.

    CABS, a conservation NGO, and Police dismantle trapping site. Photo credit: CABS

    The Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU), under the Ministry of Gozo and Planning, explained in 2021 that trappers can “control”, or temporarily capture, the seven finch species, “determine which are fitted with a ring”, and immediately release them.

    “Once data saturation has been reached for all seven finch species, the research project will terminate in its entirety,” WBRU said in 2023. The government considers that “data saturation may be reached at a threshold of 60 ring recoveries per species”.

    The Ministry for Gozo has claimed it is “the least intrusive course of action to gather quality data on the provenance of migratory finches.”

    “This initiative is generating robust information, including a significant increase in foreign ring recoveries through the clap-net system, which in some species has even surpassed existing information. In five years of such research, the information collected from ring recoveries exceeded 100 years of ring recoveries by BirdLife Malta. This information is essential for calculating the populations of these bird species,” the ministry said in a press release.

    Minister Clint Camilleri. Photo credit: DOI

    FKNK has argued that the derogation combines “deep socio-cultural traditions with scientific research” and that banning the practice risks “the potential for stagnation in the field of ornithological research”. Its president thanked the government for allowing the ‘continuity’ of the practice.

    In 2024, FKNK published a series of claims regarding the research project and EURING, the European coordinators of bird ringing schemes. These included:

    • Trappers’ nets are more effective than ringers’;
    • Each bird is screened for a scientific ring; 
    • “EURING and the local monopoly of bird-ringing made it challenging to persuade impartial candidates (…) to endorse the Project.”
    • “Throughout the open hunting and trapping seasons, the Maltese islands are effectively under police control.”

    Conservation NGOs have a different view. 

    “Trapping is an unsustainable method of hunting which causes damage to wildlife and habitats,” Birdlife Malta has said, adding elsewhere that the traditional trapping method destroys natural habitats, harms non-target wildlife, and fuels illegal wildlife trade.

    “In a last-ditch attempt to justify this discredited scheme, Minister for Hunting and Trapping Clint Camilleri, supported by Minister for the Environment Miriam Dalli, has enacted amendments to the Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations that would significantly dilute the standards for scientific bird ringing,” the NGO said.

    Minister Miriam Dalli. Photo credit: DOI

    The NGO Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) claims that, “Many bird trappers did not comply with the law even before the final finch trapping ban and either laid out their nets in spring or used electronic decoy callers. (…) Police controls are rare, and court decisions against the few convicted bird trappers are usually at the bottom of the penalty line”.

    Timeline of events:

    1st May 2004: Malta joins the EU. The EU’s legislation on wild bird conservation became binding, but Malta is allowed to phase out finch trapping and replace it with a captive breeding programme.

    2008: Arrangement expires. 

    2009-2013: Trapping is prohibited in Malta.

    2013: FKNK submits a request to reopen trapping season following the change of government.

    2014: Government reopens trapping season in autumn.

    2018: The European Court of Justice issued the first ruling on Malta’s finch trapping practice. In its ruling, it said that the government did not prove that no alternative solution exists and that insufficient evidence meant arguments that trapping affects a small number of birds could not be substantiated.

    CABS Bird Guards searching for illegalities. Photo credit: CABS

    2020: Malta’s government started declaring research derogations for trapping. 

    2024: EU court issues ruling on research derogation, finding that Malta’s authorities did not prove a lack of viable alternative, and “there is no mention of other standard scientific means of research in the ornithological field”

    2025: Legal notice 251 removes a requirement for rings to only be obtained from bird ringing schemes approved by EURING. Trappers now allowed to use live decoys.


    The European Commission’s infringement case against the research derogation remains active. The Commission has sent a letter of formal notice for failing to comply with the judgement. The Commission may decide to refer Malta back to the Court of Justice of the European Union, with a request to impose financial sanctions. The Commission’s spokesperson said, “The Commission is assessing the available information before deciding on next steps”.

    Does the derogation follow a research methodology?

    Official bird ringers, under the EURING umbrella, ring finches in the countries where they breed. The WBRU argues that the birds are not followed as they migrate, and the Maltese “research project is what renders the effort invested by bird-ringers in other countries to ring finches worthwhile”.

    To participate in the scheme, trappers must check for scientific rings, a process called ‘control’. 

    Participating trappers are “instructed and examined on the procedure”, and captured finches are “immediately released unharmed back into the wild”, “including those that are “not fitted with a scientific ring or satellite-tag”.

    Bird ringing by Birdlife’s licensed ringers. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    In Malta, bird ringing was previously carried out by Birdlife Malta, the only partner of EURING. The legal notice now allows licensing & ringing from any “qualified trainer who is part of a bird ringing scheme”.

    In a December 2024 statement, EURING said that the Maltese trapping research project “is unlikely to provide useful scientific data on a reasonable timescale, and that the poor-quality data being gathered does not meet acceptable scientific or ethical standards.” 

    “The intensity of finch trapping that is being undertaken is likely to have major impacts on bird movements and behaviour, and is therefore not compatible with studying the natural movement patterns of these species,” it continued.

    Trapper on a site. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    Nicholas Galea heads Birdlife’s EURING-approved ringing scheme in Malta, with 29 licensed ringers on the islands. According to the government’s 2023 report to the European Commission, Birdlife ringed 20,847 birds in 2023. 

    “We are not against research, but we are against the use of research as a disguise,” he told Amphora Media, confirming that in previous seasons he verified the trappers’ information on ringed birds after it is passed to him.

    “Data is always data, and information is information,” he said, adding that this does not mean he approves of the capturing method.

    Amphora Media spoke to Kaċċaturi San Ubertu’s (KSU) secretary Adrian Cauchi. KSU “practices a policy of zero tolerance towards any hunting illegalities and vets all of its members prior to acceptance.”

    Ringed hawfinch

    “I would have expected EURING to jump on the possibility be there, supervise, offer their expertise and influence, as much as possible, to the legislator to carry out the best activities for the birds,” Cauchi said, adding “why not involve trappers if you really want to convert them, if you really want to ensure that you know exactly what they’re doing, why not get them under your umbrella rather than push them as far away as possible?”

    In previous seasons, Birdlife declined government requests for ringers to accompany the trapping scheme, citing the disparity in numbers between trappers and ringers.

    “With 10 trappers and ringers, it’s fine. (…) But [the government] always wants 4,000 trappers and one or two ringers, which means the others will always do what they want,” Galea said.

    Siskins breed in woodlands and occasionally migrate past Malta

    Amphora Media also spoke to Mark-Anthony Falzon, the former chairman of the Ornis Committee (2014-2017), an advisory board made up of hunters, trappers, conservationists and government appointees.  In 2014, Falzon abstained from the vote on allowing the trapping derogation but defended the position. However, he is critical of the research derogation.

    “To do research, you need researchers. (…) Trappers are not scientists. They are not trained in any scientific method. Bird ringers are not scientists either (…) but they follow the scientific method tightly regulated by EURING,” he said.

    “For a trapper to release what they have just caught is unthinkable. It’s like winning the lottery and tearing up your ticket. (…) Some of these birds are highly prized.”

    Caged finches used as live decoys. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    Have the trappers produced quality data?

    A Wild Birds Regulation Unit’s 2024 report states that 4,105 General Licences for Live-Capturing of birds were issued. 

    In addition to collecting research forms filled by trappers, the WBRU commissioned surveys of migratory finches by two scientists with marine ecology specialisations.

    One of the objectives was “to correlate migration data gathered through the present survey with bag data for the relevant species, should any live-capturing derogations or research derogation be applied during the autumn season of the contracted years.”

    Linnet

    However, the authors said “the two sets were collected for different purposes, using very different methodologies, and therefore the magnitude of values are not directly comparable” which is required for “robust and rigorous assessment”. 

    For example, on some days, trappers caught over 200 common linnets and 50 common chaffinches. In contrast, staff at monitoring stations across Malta counted up to 10 common linnets and even fewer common chaffinches per day – sometimes none. 

    Malta submits yearly derogation reports to the European Commission. This is what the trappers have found over the years, according to these reports.

    YearRinged birds foundNotes about the birds
    20207 finches1 ringed by Birdlife Malta, others ringed in Hungary, Italy and Russia
    202115 finches6 ringed in Malta, others ringed in Italy, Slovakia, Greece, Hungary, Slovenia, Lithuania, Spain
    20221 finchRinged in Malta
    2023
    17 finches    		Ringed in Italy, Switzerland, Russia, Poland, Finland and Slovenia
    Total40 finches8 finches ringed in Malta

    Reports to the Commission reveal that across thousands of trapping sites, trappers “controlled” only 40 ringed finches, and a fifth of them had already been caught by bird ringers in Malta.

    A comparison with the government contractor’s data, suggests trapping hundreds of finches has resulted in very few ring recoveries, including only one in 2022. Trappers also send reports on rings that EURING was unable to verify.

    Chaffinch

    EURING’s data Amphora had access to shows that out of 64 ring records submitted between 2020 and 2024, 18 had flaws: unclear country of origin, untraceable ring number, unknown scheme, or suspicious bird properties.

    Fourteen birds carried a Maltese ring, but in several cases, trappers incorrectly recorded ring numbers. Ten of the birds had already been confiscated from trappers and apparently re-trapped.

    “You can’t have 4,000 trapper-ringers all active at the same time in such a small country, because the same birds will be caught and caught all over again causing too much disturbance and stress,” Galea said.

    Caged finches used as live decoys. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    “It’s difficult to decipher what people submitted. Sometimes they catch birds with our rings, and I cannot conclude which one it is. And really, what they’ve been discovering is that they’ve discovered nothing new.” Before trapping was outlawed, Birdlife Malta had already collected and published data on finches from trappers.

    A search on Google Scholar for the listed finch species, the mention of Malta and WBRU did not return ornithology or biology articles, except for one that was about ticks in birds and was co-authored by Nicholas Galea.

    KSU has implemented turtle dove satellite tagging projects, which Cauchi cites as an example of how traditional trappers can be retrained and benefit research. “The trapper was happy. The traditional method was kept, and this study and the research part was kept as well.”

    The Ministry of Gozo and Planning did not respond to Amphora’s questions, and neither did FKNK.

    Has the research effort reduced illegal trapping?

    One of the conditions of applicable European laws for issuing derogations is that the practice must be appropriately supervised. But enforcement resources have been gradually reduced over the years, Malta’s derogation reports to the European Commission reveal.

    Police officers confiscating nets and finches. Photo credit: CABS

    The number of officers dropped from a maximum of 64 to a maximum of 53 between 2020 and 2023; as has the number of vehicles from 15 to 9. 

    YearNo. of officersNo. of vehicles
    2020Minimum 53, maximum 6415
    2021Minimum 44, maximum 5918
    2022Minimum 42, maximum 5618
    2023Minimum 49, maximum 539

    The EU’s court found that “In the context of Malta, characterised by a very high density of licence holders […] the fact that merely 23% of hunters have been subject to individual checks seems inadequate”.

    The Malta Ranger Unit has recorded alleged instances of illegal trapping of protected species, use of illegal devices, and trapping outside the permitted hours. In a recent case, illegalities reported by the MRU led to a conviction of a trapper and cancellation of his licence.

    Camilla Appelgren, from the MRU, told Amphora Media that officers often lacked training and coordination. At the same time, trappers allegedly had extensive networks of CCTV cameras and spotters to monitor NGO and police presence.

    Trapping site from above. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    “There are times we don’t have any environmental police, and the district police don’t take environmental cases, so there is no one to call,” she said. 

    During the first days of the season MRU, Birdlife and police collaborated in an operation which led tthe o confiscation of illegally used equipment, including electronic bird callers, and unattended clap nets.

    Gozo, meanwhile, presents a separate issue altogether. Data shows that contraventions are minimal compared to Malta. In 2023, there were 50 contraventions in Malta, compared to 12 in Gozo.

    Policer officers dismantling nets in Gozo. Photo credit: CABS

    “With respect to hunting and trapping, it’s an open secret, really, that in Gozo, there is much less law enforcement, and police find it very hard to do their job,” Falzon added.

    Galea and Appelgren warned that trappers inform each other of police presence, especially in Gozo”.

    Enforcement Figures (Source: WBRU): 

    YearContraventions on MaltaUnidentified suspectsContraventions on GozoUnidentified suspects
    20202311, or 48%65, or 83%
    20219620, or 21%2622, or 85%
    2022566, or 11%33, or 100%
    20235012, or 24%126, or 50%

    On 16th October, a trapper from Mgarr, caught in September 2022, was sentenced and had his trapping licence revoked for three years, CABS said in a press release. CABS members went to court as witnesses.

    Between 2014 and 2024, the NGO’s reports resulted in 298 prosecutions for trapping illegalities. Out of those, 187 trappers were convicted, and “thousands” of birds were seized”.

    Cauchi of KSU disagrees that policing levels are low. “You’ll see the police every day, twice, three times a day,” he said. His view is that illegalities are decreasing, but evidence collection methods have improved, and more of them make it to court.

    “We should let authorities work and one of the key objectives is to ensure that trappers become researchers in their entirety. These things require a generational change. [An octogenarian] is a difficult person to change. I’m the next generation. I’m a converted man. I would very happily, very happily give all my [hunting and trapping] licences and just do ringing.”

    Illegal robin trapping used to be common in Malta but has been largely eradicated

    He suggests that, contrary to popular view, KSU, as a hunters’ and trappers’ organisation practices discipline and enforcement internally. 

    “We don’t go and say these things on Facebook, but we do it in our own circles. The results speak for themselves in terms of targeting of protected species.” He would like to see court-mandated courses to rehabilitate perpetrators of illegal trapping.

    Police spokesperson did not reply  to Amphora Media’s questions.

    Is trapping environmentally sustainable?

    Superimposing the map of 2024’s licensed trapping sites on the map of Natura 2000 sites, which is allowed in Malta, reveals significant overlaps. Trappers can catch birds along the entire protected Southwestern coast of Malta and Southern Gozo. Trapping sites next to bird sanctuaries can also be found.  The EU’s court criticised the decision.

    Trapping sites (pins) in protected Natura 2000 zones (red areas) in North Malta. Bird sanctuaries are shaded in green. Data sources: WBRU & ERA

    Appelgren of MRU reports having observed cases where trappers clear vegetation, drastically reducing biodiversity at the sites they use. “It’s worse than hunting, they kill their land, and so that nothing will grow, and they keep them barren for the purpose of trapping birds,”she said.

    Trapping sites (pins) in protected Natura 2000 zones (red areas) in Gozo. Bird sanctuaries are shaded in green. Data sources: WBRU & ERA

    In 2014, the FKNK acknowledged the use of agricultural pesticides but claimed this “can easily be reversed”.

    Falzon doesn’t see a reason why Natura 2000 protection should exclude trapping. “So you have people fishing, you have people walking dogs and a million other things. Why not trapping?”

    Asked about the matter, the European Commission’s spokesperson said that “The Commission has no information on the practice in question.”

    Falzon warns that rampant development will likely spell the demise of the trapping hobby. “In the past there were trapping sites all over the place. Now there are far fewer” .

    Trapping site. Photo credit: Birdlife Malta

    Cauchi of KSU believes that unsustainable agricultural practices threaten finches, and that there is scope for trappers and conservationists coming together to protect birds. “I’d be willing to sit down with another moderate individual, but I cannot sit down with someone whose idea is abolishing hunting and trapping,” he said.

    The government’s claims to allow trapping as a scientific derogation are misleading. 

    The research derogation has resulted in few ring recoveries and, despite hundreds of birds caught and dozens of rings recorded. Trappers’ data has not been cited in published scientific literature that could be found on Google Scholar. Many of the recovered rings belong to birds already caught in Malta. Trappers’ representatives consider that ringer’s refusal to cooperate explains it.

    Police presence remains weak, especially in Gozo, while monitoring 4,000 trappers is a major logistical challenge. Many experts, including those in favour of trapping, said the derogation is a guise and that quality data is not being produced. However, KSU expressed willingness to shift its trapper members to ringers in the future.

    Rather, as Mark Anthony Falzon puts it:

    “[Trapping] is a practice that I think should be absolutely valued for what it is. Malta should make its case that this is a local practice that has value. This is why this deception is going to fail.”

    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.

  • Cruise Ships Plugged in Grand Harbour Onshore Power Supply Only 9% of Time in First Year

    Cruise Ships Plugged in Grand Harbour Onshore Power Supply Only 9% of Time in First Year

    By Joanna Demarco

    • Cruise ships in Malta’s Grand Harbour connected to the onshore power supply system just 9% of the time in the first year
    • Cruise vessel traffic and arrivals continue to rise annually, now at over 940,000 visitors, raising doubts about whether overall air pollution is actually decreasing compared to the years prior.
    • Shorter stays saw higher OPS use: 19% of ships berthed for a day or less plugged in, while none of those docked for longer than two days did.
    • MSC World Europa accounted for just over half of OPS connections, yet failed to plug in on several occasions.
    • Carnival Corporation’s liners used the technology only 6 times out of 58 calls, despite contractual obligations and available equipment.
    • The 45% of port arrivals occur at 7am or earlier, intensifying early-morning noise and air pollution in nearby communities.
    • The Senglea air monitoring station — which tracked near- real-time particulate matter — was removed in October 2024, reducing both monitoring of a ‘crucial’ pollutant and transparency in air quality monitoring around the Grand Harbour.
    • Local residents continue to raise health concerns, with the Southern Harbour region recording the highest asthma hospital discharge rate in Malta between 2017 and 2022.
    • Costs, grid stability, and outdated ship technology as possible reasons for low OPS uptake.

    After a year in service, Malta’s Onshore Power Supply (OPS) system was used by cruise ships just 9% of the time, according to an analysis by Amphora Media.

    That translates to roughly five and a half minutes per hour for every cruise ship berthing in the Grand Harbour. 

    Using publicly available data from the Valletta Cruise Port website and records on OPS (shore-to-ship) connections obtained from Transport Malta through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, Amphora Media was able to calculate the total percentage of time vessels plugged in between July 2024 – when the ship-to-shore system in the Grand Harbour kicked off – and July 2025. 

    The data also shows that, as the number of cruise ships plugging into the OPS continues to gain momentum, the flow of cruise ships berthing in Malta’s Grand Harbour is also increasing annually.

    The OPS system at the Valletta Cruise Port. Image credit: Kian Bugeja/ DOI

    The technology for cruise liners, launched by the government in 2024 and co-funded by the European Union, allows vessels to plug into the national power grid, instead of generating power from their own engines, slashing harmful pollutant emissions.

    It was launched nine months prior to the EU setting a 2030 deadline for maritime ports to install onshore power supply infrastructure and for vessels to plug in.

    Shore-to-ship promises to slash 90% of air pollution from berthed cruise ships in the Grand Harbour for roughly 17,000 people who live in the surrounding areas. 

    Research by the organisation Transport & Environment shows that the shipping sector is one of the leading sources of greenhouse gas emissions, air and water pollution.

    It is estimated to be responsible for more than 250,000 premature deaths per year worldwide, from cancer and cardiovascular diseases alone. And while all ship types have an environmental and climate impact, air pollution from cruise ships is particularly worrying, Transport & Environment highlights.

    OPS Was Not Used for Longer Stays

    Within the one-year period analysed by Amphora Media – between July 10th 2024 and July 10th 2025 – there were 373 cruise ship berths in the Grand Harbour. Out of these, the vessels plugged into the shore-to-ship technology 67 times, and not always for the complete duration of the stay.

    Out of the total number of vessels at the port (without calculating power supply usage):

    • 312 were berthed for one day or less 
    • 38 were berthed between one and two days
    • 23 were berthed for between two to four days

    Our analysis shows that cruise ships were more likely to plug into the onshore power supply when berthing for one day or less (19.6% compared to 16.2% and 0%). No cruise ships that were berthed for two to four days used the technology.

    Shipping giant MSC, which co-owns Palumbo Malta Shipyard LTD, located within the same waters, plugged into Malta’s system over half (35) of the total 67 instances in which the system was used, with its MSC World Europa cruise ship. However, the same cruise ship did not plug into the OPS on another 16 occasions when it was berthed. 

    Asked by Amphora Media why they would decide to plug-in on some occasions but not on others, the company did not reply.

    Since signing a ‘‘shore power agreement’ with the Maltese government, Carnival Corporation’s cruise liners only made use of the technology 6 out of 58 times berthing in the Grand Harbour, even in the cases where the vessel has shown the capability to plug in.

    For example, the cruise vessel Costa Fascinosa plugged into the OPS technology on 13th June 2025, however, it did not make use of the technology during its following three berths in the port between June and July. Similarly, Aida Diva plugged into the system on 1st April 2025 but not on 8th April 2025.

    In a request for comment, Transport Malta explained that Carnival Corporation connected to the OPS infrastructure for “testing and commissioning purposes to obtain the necessary certification” as “Onshore Power Supply ready”, adding that “once this process is completed, the vessels will be able to use the system routinely.” Carnival Corporation echoed the same justification.

    Transport Malta turned down Amphora Media’s request for a copy of the shore power agreement, citing “strict” confidentiality due to its “commercial nature”.

    Images of cruise vessels emitting fumes taken by a Floriana resident.

    Number of Cruise Ships and Passengers in Grand Harbour on the Rise Again

    Following a near-standstill of cruise ship activity during the COVID-19 year 2020, the number of cruise ships berthing in the Grand Harbour have been increasing annually, with the number of passengers hitting record figures in 2024 and registering quasi-pre-pandemic levels in terms of cruise vessel calls.

    Valletta Cruise Port figures show 357 cruise liner calls in 2024. That’s up from 312 calls in 2023 and 283 in 2022, and slightly lower than the 372 calls logged in 2019.

    Meanwhile, passenger numbers also hit new all-time highs: 940,915 in 2024, compared with 889,336 in 2023 and just 147,132 in 2021, and more than the 902,425 recorded in 2019.

    This means that for overall air pollution in the area to decline, the emissions avoided through OPS must outweigh the added emissions from the rising number of berthed ships

    The government celebrates this constant growth in cruise arrivals. However, residents in the area who are concerned about the impact fumes spewing out of the ships are having on their health do not share the same jovial tone.

    For Alex, a resident who has been living in Floriana for over a decade, the growing presence of cruise ships has led to increased noise pollution and a growing concern about the impact this surge in numbers is having on his own health and that of the rest of the community. 

    “Now they [cruise ships] come in at 5:30am in the morning,” he told Amphora Media. “Sometimes the whole building shakes … just to give you an idea of the impact”.

    Data collected by Amphora Media indicates that 45% of port call arrivals occur at 7am or earlier, with the earliest port arrivals occurring at 4:30am.

    Together with other residents, Alex started a Facebook group called ‘Clean Air for the Grand Harbour’, and since then has lent an ear to residents, who have noticed a decline in their respiratory health, among other concerns.

    Figures can back up the reality of respiratory issues for residents surrounding the Grand Harbour. 

    Data on asthma as a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis from Mater Dei Hospital between 2017 and 2022, made available to Amphora Media, shows that on average, the Southern Harbour region – which includes Floriana, Valletta, The Three Cities, and other towns surrounding the Grand Harbour – was the district with the highest discharge rates.

    The region experienced 1.18 diagnoses per 1000 people over the six years, followed by an average of 0.95 in the Northern district and 0.91 in the Northern Harbour district.

    Infrastructure Malta, the agency overseeing the shift to OPS technology, had in fact stated in 2023 that “17,000 families residing around the Grand Harbour area” would benefit from cleaner air through the investment. 

    The Environment Ministry did not reply to questions by Amphora Media on the matter.

    Prime Minister Robert Abela and Carnival UK & P&O Cruises President Paul Ludlow shake hands at the signing of the agreement. Image credit: DOI

    The reasons not to use the OPS system today may vary.

    Francisco Ferreira, President of the Portuguese NGO Zero, which closely monitors the development of OPS systems in Portugal, explained that vessels are not yet equipped with the technology or choose not to connect, as plugging in is often more expensive than running on their own fuel.

    Transport Malta reiterated that before the 2030 obligation designated by the new EU law, “subject to the condition that vessels comply with emission requirements, connecting to the onshore power, at this stage, remains the prerogative of the shipping line.” According to Ferreira, one of the biggest challenges for cruise lines is retrofitting their fleets.

    “In many cases, if you have an old ship, it’s better to scrap it than retrofit it. It’s better to buy or build a new one. (…) The problem we see in this industry is the very slow pace of transformation from the current fleet to one capable of connecting to onshore power supply.”

    He also stressed the importance of competitive pricing for OPS. “If the cost difference is too high, retrofitting becomes more attractive to operators than continuing to rely on diesel while at berth,” he said.

    The Transport Ministry did not reply to Amphora Media’s questions on the prices Malta has currently for the use of the OPS infrastructure.

    Senglea Air Monitoring Station Removed, and Particulate Matter Monitoring Removed With It

    As cruise ships in the Grand Harbour increase, and OPS technology use remains low, the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA)’s mobile air monitoring station in Senglea has been removed, along with its near-real-time monitoring data, which was available for the public to view online.

    Questioned about the absence of the monitor, a spokesperson for ERA confirmed the removal to Amphora Media.

    “The mobile station was intended to be located there for a specific period to collect enough samples to be able to perform a study on any impact shipping in the Grand Harbour may have on air quality,” the spokesperson said. “This monitoring exercise was completed and removed from Senglea at the end of October 2024.”

    The air quality in the area is now only monitored through the passive diffusive tube network, meaning that as of October last year, residents surrounding the Grand Harbour do not have access to monitor air pollution in the area in real-time.  

    The passive diffusion tube network monitors the Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and Benzene levels around the island. The mobile monitoring stations, meanwhile, additionally calculate Particulate Matter (PM) levels and Ozone (O3) levels, among others. 

    In a conversation with Amphora Media, BirdLife Malta’s Head of Conservation, Nicholas Barbara, explained that monitoring particulate matter is “crucial” for monitoring the impact of the air pollution on the health of people in the area, and there is no other way to monitor PM levels other than through live monitoring. 

    BirdLife Malta has been one of the local NGOs at the forefront of advocating for clean air in the area.

    “If they are going back to the diffuser only, they are not measuring the particulate matter at all.” he said. 

    Barbara argued that the government should now be thinking of a more permanent setup to continue the monitoring efforts that were covered by the Senglea monitor, since “the cruise ship industry is not going to go [anywhere], for sure, in the coming years”.

    By the time of publication, ERA did not reply to questions on the absence of monitoring particulate matter in the area and the Environment Ministry did not reply to questions about the decrease in monitoring in the area.

    Potential Strain on National Grid Could Be Legitimate Reason Not to Connect to OPS Under New EU Law

    Concerns about the stability of Malta’s national grid in relation to OPS technology have been raised since the introduction of the new system.

    Last year, it made headlines after Prime Minister Robert Abela pointed to it as one of the reasons why the power grid was under pressure.

    In July, the Nationalist Party also questioned the stability and reliability of the shore-to-ship power supply after alleging that cruise liners suffered power outages while connected to the national grid – allegations that Transport Malta and Enemalta denied. 

    Under the new EU law, vessels will be allowed not to plug in to OPS systems in cases where they are “unable to connect to OPS because, exceptionally, the electrical grid stability is at risk, due to insufficient available shore-power to satisfy the ship’s required electrical power demand at berth.”

    This investigation is part of Senza Segnale, a collaborative project that reconnects news deserts in the Mediterranean.

    Senza Segnale is a project by Amphora Media and IrpiMedia; in collaboration with Fada, Facta, Indip, Infonodes, Centro di Giornalismo Permanente; in cooperation with the Allianz Foundation.

  • Fatti: Is Malta One Of The Least Polluting Countries?

    Fatti: Is Malta One Of The Least Polluting Countries?

    “We [Malta] are among the countries that pollute the least.”

    Environment Minister Miriam Dalli made the bold claim at an informal meeting of EU Environment Ministers in Aalborg this July, while discussing new EU measures and targets to curb pollution, policies that could prove both costly and unpopular at home.

    Minister Miriam Dalli. Photo credit: DOI

    Yet Malta’s energy policy has come under criticism from EU institutions. Council has urged the government to “wind down the emergency energy support measures”, which is estimated to be worth around 1% of Malta’s GDP on subsidising climate-harming fuels. In a meeting with social partners, Prime Minister Robert Abela promised to retain these subsidies in the 2026 budget.

    According to the Commission, Malta maintains sizeable fossil-fuel subsidies without a planned phase-out before 2030. Many of these subsidies neither protect vulnerable households nor safeguard energy security, and hinder the shift to cleaner transport and industry.

    Both narratives overlook one crucial factor: Malta’s environmental footprint extends beyond its coastline. Our impact extends outward through ships and planes, our waste and electricity, and all that we consume to keep the island running.

    Against this backdrop, Dalli’s claim raises a key question: is Malta really such a small polluter?

    Speaking in Aalborg, Minister Dalli said:

    “To achieve [Climate neutrality by 2050] we need to have specific targets, but we want those targets to be fair, ensuring they follow the most cost-effective path. We want the national circumstances of different countries to be taken into consideration, particularly in our case, since we [Malta] are among the countries that pollute the least.”

    “We need to make sure that what we are agreeing upon is being implemented and is realistic for countries, particularly for small countries like Malta, where our position is to keep insisting that Malta is the country with the lowest per capita pollution in the European Union. We are making every possible effort, but we do not want to place a burden on the people.” 

    In 2023, more than a third of people (35%) in Malta reported exposure to pollution, grime, and other environmental problems. This is the highest share in the EU and nearly three times the EU average of 12%. High-earning households were even more affected than low-earning ones. However, the share was 40% in 2013.

    When we look at domestic net greenhouse gas emissions per capita, Malta’s are indeed third-lowest, as of 2023. But this calculation has an important caveat: “emissions from international aviation and maritime transport are excluded”.

    Counting emissions strictly within national boundaries fails to capture the total pollution generated by a country’s economy.

    Many other EU economies emit greenhouse gases to produce the goods and services people need, such as food or household items.

    Malta has the lowest share of agricultural production in its economy (alongside Luxembourg), the third-lowest share of manufacturing, and even the third-lowest share of construction.  That means, for all the added value generated in the Maltese consumer economy, the contribution of productive industries is minimal.

    To account for this, the EU also calculates greenhouse gas footprint. Here, as of 2022 Malta ranks in the middle third of EU countries emissions per capita linked to consumption.

    In other countries industry is a major generator of emissions. Malta has hardly any productive industry

    Malta’s invisible emissions: The sea and air

    That’s not everything. Footprint calculations follow “the concepts and definitions of national accounts.” These accounts do not include international aviation and navigation (shipping). According to UN standards, these are reported separately and are not subject to the limitation and reduction commitments under the Kyoto Protocol . This has left governments with fewer incentives to reduce emissions in these sectors.

    Malta’s tourism boom has seen an increase in aircraft travelling in and out of Malta.

    The Malta International Airport reported nearly 59,000 aircraft movements in 2024, up from around 51,000 in 2023 and some 40,000 in 2022. The amount of cargo flown in also increased, with planes transporting almost 24,000 tonnes of cargo in 2024. As of April Malta’s aircraft registry has 929 planes and other aircraft types.

    Meanwhile, Malta’s maritime registry grew by almost 10% in 2024, strengthening Malta’s position as the largest maritime registry in Europe and the sixth largest in the world.

    Ships can register in any country, without having links to it. Shipping companies, which already enjoy VAT advantages, can register in low-tax jurisdictions and compete with more environmentally friendly means of transportation.

    According to NSO’s latest data, there were 8,644 vessels under the Maltese flag as of 2022, with 797 new vessels added. Three-quarters of these new additions were pleasure yachts.

    The government has announced that in the first quarter of 2025, the registry surpassed 10,000, and Malta has the largest registry of superyachts in the world. 

    According to Eurostat (2023 data), with nearly 46,000 ships, Malta ranked 9th in the EU in terms of vessel arrivals. Meanwhile, data from Transport Malta shows that 779 vessels arrived in Malta with wheeled cargo, such as vehicles. Additionally, 470 ships transported crude oil, and 420 vessels carried cruise passengers.

    In 2023, the European Federation for Transport and Environment, an advocacy group, published a study on the cruise industry and stated that “The sector still relies almost entirely on fossil fuels of the dirtiest kind, full of toxic substances including sulphur.”

    In 2021, researchers at Indiana University estimated that a superyacht with a permanent crew, helicopter pad, submarines and pools is “by far the worst asset to own from an environmental standpoint”.

    Oxfam’s 2024 analysis found that “an ultra-rich European on their yachts emits, on average, as much carbon as an ordinary European would in 585 years”. It shows that 22% of superyachts’ overall emissions are generated while moored, which means that Malta-flagged superyachts moored elsewhere would pollute another country while enjoying exemptions from EU carbon pricing.

    A 2023 strategy document by the Transport Ministry aimed to “make Malta a jurisdiction of choice for the superyacht industry”, adding that “diligence must be exercised to ensure that coastal infrastructure and other activities associated with yachting do not cause pollution or deterioration of the coastal environment.” Words like ‘emissions’, ‘carbon’ and ‘greenhouse’ are never mentioned.

    The EU has taken steps to account for the pollution from planes and ships within the bloc. Companies flying to and from the EU must obtain emissions allowances. Since last year, the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) has been extended to maritime transport (shipping) emissions. For now, 12 companies are assigned to report to Malta.

    These changes mean that counting and reducing emissions is gradually becoming mandatory for ships and planes, through international frameworks that require reporting and impose reduction obligations— though these systems do not yet set absolute caps on total emissions. The rules on shipping are new and will be phased in gradually, so we will need to wait for statistics.

    Malta’s waste overseas: Over 130,000 tonnes sent abroad for recycling

    Waste is another item that Malta partly offloads to other countries. Its reliance on exporting waste for recycling (see our earlier reporting) makes it challenging to calculate what share of exported waste is actually recycled and what ends up burnt or landfilled abroad, generating emissions without satisfying consumer demand the way real recycling does.

    Ministers Miriam Dalli and Chris Bonnet at the Maghtab Facility. Photo credit: DOI

    According to 2023 NSO data, Malta sent around 130,000 tonnes of waste abroad for recycling and nearly 12,000 tonnes for energy recovery. 

    Plugged In Abroad:  A third of Malta’s electricity is imported

    Energy supply figures show that Malta’s dependence on energy imports increased between 2023 and 2024.

    Last year, nearly a third of Enemalta’s supply came from the Malta-Sicily interconnector (less than a quarter in 2023).

    About two-thirds of this import was generated by natural gas – a fossil fuel – and only 8% by renewables.

    A highly polluting power station in Marsa has been closed. Photo credit: Enemalta

    In absolute terms, the increase in electricity imports appears even more striking, rising from 648.36 GWh in 2023 to 970.42 GWh in 2024. Italy itself is a net importer – it imports energy for its own needs.

    Through the interconnector, Malta can also export energy, but these exports dwindled between 2022 and 2024.

    Minister Dalli refers to a “burden” in her comments after EU recommendations to stop subsidising fossil fuels.

    In July, ARMS Ltd, an entity under Dalli’s ministry, circulated individual letters to households, saying, “The government is fulfilling its commitment to support families amidst the increase in international oil and energy prices, which support is resulting in continuous savings for you.”

    According to the European Environment Agency, fossil fuel subsidies in 2023 in Malta represented the highest share of gross domestic product (GDP) among EU countries. Energy subsidies were the third-largest item in the Programmes and Initiatives category of the state budget, in the first half of 2025, after social security benefits and church schools.

    A recommendation drafted by the European Commission was scathing: “In Malta, fossil-fuel subsidies – such as the ongoing support to Enemalta, subsidies for petroleum producers, and a reduction of excise duties on petrol and diesel – are economically inefficient and act as disincentives to the uptake of renewables and the decarbonisation of economic activities. Moreover, they represent a budgetary burden on Malta’s public finances.”

    When considering domestic net greenhouse gas emissions per capita alone, Malta is indeed among the lowest polluters. However, it refuses to recognise the full picture.

    In the context of climate change, it is relevant to consider the total demand generated by each country’s consumer economy, not only emissions within its national boundaries. 

    When a country’s economy benefits from sectors not accounted for in the national emissions accounts, such as shipping, consumer products, and other services like electricity, it is essential to account for their emissions when examining the environmental impact of Malta’s economic activity. 

    Given Malta’s consumption emissions place closer to the EU average, its wide shipping industry, growing air travel, and increasing external electricity production, Minister Dalli’s statement that Malta is among the least polluting countries in the EU is misleading, especially when considering that one in three people in Malta have reported exposure to pollution, the highest in the EU.

    This is especially true in the context of measures to rein in climate change, which include phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies.

    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: 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.