- In the second SRG survey, the biodiversity initiative has suffered significant losses.
- 51 percent of respondents currently reject the popular initiative, only 46 percent are in favor of it.
- A reversal of the trend before the vote on September 22 is unlikely.
- The second proposal, the reform of occupational pensions, has also lost support.
The biodiversity initiative was a delicate plant from the beginning. Now it is in danger of withering at the ballot box: the unstable yes in the first SRG survey has become a stable no within a few weeks.
No signs of trend reversal
In numbers: Around a month ago, 51 percent wanted to vote yes – now it’s only 46 percent. At the same time, the proportion of those surveyed who voted no has risen from 43 to 51 percent. Once again, a direct democratic “law of nature” has proven true: the closer the vote comes, the more popular initiatives lose support.
There is hardly any evidence of a turnaround. People’s initiatives are often successful when they are driven by a “something has to happen now!” But such an effect cannot be seen with the biodiversity initiative.
“If approval rates drop so significantly, it is almost impossible to reverse the trend before the vote,” says Lukas Golder from the GFS Bern research institute, which conducted the survey on behalf of SRG SSR.
The seeds of doubt
In the course of the referendum campaign, the positions of the electorate have increasingly aligned themselves with those of the bourgeois parties and the Federal Council, which reject the initiative. Only in the left-green camp does the environmental issue continue to have strong support.
The surveys show that many people are concerned about preserving nature and landscapes. But: “There are doubts as to whether the issue is really that relevant at the moment,” says Golder.
There is also a widespread feeling that the federal government and cantons are already doing enough to preserve biodiversity. “All of this puts the issue into perspective and highlights its weaknesses.”
Productive agriculture vs. intact recreational space
In rural areas in particular, there are concerns that overly rigid regulations could weaken agriculture. The arguments of the powerful farmers’ association are once again finding fertile ground here. In contrast, there is the “somewhat nostalgic view” in urban areas, as Golder calls it: “Here, people want nature as a recreational area with intact biodiversity.”
Recreational space or usable space? The idea of what “the land” and “nature” should look like also depends on where you live.
Keystone/Gaetan Bally
Unsurprisingly, there is a gap between opponents and supporters in the urban and rural areas. The referendum will have a particularly difficult time in rural German-speaking cantons. “Achieving a majority of the cantons will be a very high hurdle for the initiative,” estimates the political scientist from GFS Bern.
The issue itself enjoys sympathy among the population. However, the level of suffering is too low for many people to demand action at the ballot box. Golder also says that the biodiversity initiative lacks the “inspiring power” that environmental associations and left-green parties have when it comes to climate protection, for example.
In such a mood, it is hardly possible to successfully bring a popular initiative to fruition. The political scientist’s conclusion: “There would need to be a turning point before the vote that would make it clear to people that something has to be done now. But I don’t expect that to happen – the no vote is likely to be clear.”