Adaptation of EU policy during geopolitical change: the impact on forest use, bioenergy, and climate security in the Baltic region

Background Forests in the Baltic Sea region store carbon, harbour biodiversity, sustain rural livelihoods and supply wood for materials and heating. Since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, sanctions on Russian and Belarusian wood and energy have disrupted these supply chains. This raises concern that the pursuit of energy security may increase pressure on forests, weaken carbon sinks and shift environmental impacts abroad. EU Member States set out how they will meet the 2030 energy and climate targets in National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs), updated in 2024. This is the first study to examine these updates for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland and Sweden through the lenses of climate security and “nexus thinking”, an approach that treats energy, land, ecosystems and society as interconnected. It combines content analysis of the five plans with 22 interviews with regional stakeholders. Results All five countries are turning to domestic bioenergy to replace Russian fuels, mainly forest residues and low-grade wood for district heating and combined heat and power. The Baltic states link forests mainly to energy sovereignty, grid integration with continental Europe and rural jobs. Sweden and Finland embed them in longer-term strategies for the bioeconomy, carbon sinks, hydrogen and carbon capture. Most plans favor using high-quality timber for products and residues for energy. Yet the plans only partly reflect the new situation: many adjustments happen in practice, outside the formal NECP framework. Climate, energy and human security are treated as parallel rather than potentially conflicting goals. Coordination is weak between EU and national levels, across sectors and among neighbouring countries. Finland’s forests, now a net emission source rather than a carbon sink, illustrate the trade-offs at stake. Conclusions Forests are becoming strategic security resources, but energy-security policies could unintentionally intensify logging, weaken carbon sinks and harm biodiversity. Forest, energy, biodiversity, climate and trade policy should therefore be governed together. Useful steps include harmonised EU reporting of fuelwood use, stronger rules prioritising material use of wood, biomass limits tied to carbon-sink and biodiversity indicators, building renovation to cut heat demand, and closer Baltic–Nordic cooperation on supply risks.