Which organization has enacted the Nature Restoration Law (NRL) to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss?

Shows climate change and biodiversity are treated as linked issues by international treaties and coordinated secretariats.

A student could check whether the EU, as a party or actor in those international processes, has turned such coordinated aims into regional legislation (e.g., by searching EU legislative records).

Describes explicit policy mechanisms and government engagement to ensure conservation and restoration of ecosystems (coastal Blue Carbon).

One could infer that restoration is a recognized policy approach and then look for EU-level laws or proposals that adopt similar restoration mechanisms.

Defines restoration and management of natural resources as a main objective of biodiversity conservation strategies.

A student could use this definition to interpret a law titled 'Nature Restoration' as fitting established conservation objectives and then verify whether the EU has formalized such objectives in legislation.

Identifies the European Commission/EU as an active initiator of climate initiatives (the GCCA), showing the EU engages in supranational climate actions.

Knowing the EU can launch and administer climate programs, a student could search EU Commission proposals, directives, or regulations for a Nature Restoration Law.

States that climate change causes biodiversity loss, implying that policies addressing restoration could plausibly be framed to tackle both problems together.

A student could use this linkage to assess whether any EU law's stated goals include both climate mitigation/adaptation and biodiversity restoration.

Shows the World Bank administers climate/biodiversity financing instruments (BioCarbon Fund), indicating the Bank acts via funds and programs rather than national law-making.

A student could check whether the World Bank typically issues binding 'laws' or instead provides financing/guidance to countries, which would make the existence of a Bank-enacted law less likely.

Describes international policy goals and mainstreaming biodiversity into government planning, illustrating that biodiversity action often takes form of targets/strategies integrated into national systems.

One could use this to infer that major biodiversity measures are commonly adopted as international targets or national laws rather than unilateral laws by multilateral banks.

References multilateral summits where many countries commit to protection targets, showing climate/biodiversity responses are often state-led international agreements.

A student could contrast the role of summits and national commitments with the institutional role of the World Bank to judge whether the Bank would 'enact' a law.

Explains the link between climate change and biodiversity loss, clarifying the subject matter that a 'Nature Restoration Law' would address and why international actors engage on it.

Knowing the policy area, a student might look up which institutions (governments, conventions, or finance institutions) normally create binding legal instruments in this domain.

Defines biodiversity conservation objectives (protection, restoration, management), indicating typical policy tools and objectives used to tackle such problems.

A student could use this to assess whether the World Bank's usual tools (funding, projects, policy loans) align with creating an independent law named 'NRL' or with supporting national laws and restoration projects.

Describes OECD's mandate, headquarters and role as an international organisation and UN observer focused on economic progress and policy guidance.

A student could combine this with the basic fact that international organisations that 'stimulate economic progress' typically issue guidance/reports rather than enact binding laws, so they should check whether NRL is a law from a national/regional authority instead.

Gives an example of OECD's activity — launching a policy/analytical project (Decarbonising Transport) with national partners rather than creating laws.

Use this pattern to infer OECD more commonly runs projects and provides analysis; verify whether the NRL was produced as a project/report or as legislation by a government/union.

Explains that parties develop, adopt and implement national biodiversity strategies and action plans as policy instruments — showing that biodiversity measures are often adopted by Parties (states) not by international secretariats.

Combine with the fact that 'Parties' refers to treaty members (states) to check whether NRL is a treaty obligation or domestic/regional law rather than an OECD enactment.

States a strategic goal to mainstream biodiversity across government and society, illustrating the typical content and objectives of biodiversity policy instruments.

A student could compare the objectives and scope described here with the text/source of the NRL to see if it matches OECD guidance or national/regional legal language.

Notes the three Rio conventions (UNFCCC, CBD, UNCCD) and coordination between their secretariats, showing that international treaties and their parties coordinate biodiversity and climate actions.

Use this to suspect that major binding measures on biodiversity/climate originate from treaties or national laws linked to those conventions, so check whether NRL is linked to CBD/UNFCCC processes rather than the OECD.

Shows FAO acts as one of multiple UN agencies collaborating on international programmes (UN-REDD) focused on forest/deforestation mitigation rather than as a national law‑maker.

A student could use this pattern (FAO as programme partner) plus basic knowledge that international agencies typically run programmes/guidelines to infer FAO is more likely to support/advise than 'enact' a law, and then check which institution passed the NRL.

States FAO is 'involved in implementation' of initiatives alongside a national ministry, indicating a supporting/implementing role in national programmes.

Use this example to reason that FAO participates in implementation with governments, so the formal enactment of laws likely rests with national authorities — prompting verification of the NRL's legislative origin.

Describes the Government of India taking 'enactments of laws' for conservation, highlighting that governments enact laws for biodiversity protection.

Combine this rule (governments enact conservation laws) with the question to check whether the NRL is a national/legislative act rather than an FAO action.

Explains links between biodiversity loss and climate change, establishing the substantive policy area the NRL would address (biodiversity + climate), useful for checking mandates of organizations involved.

A student could match this policy area to FAO's stated mandates/programmes to see if issuing laws fits FAO's typical activities.

Gives an example (Koronivia-KjWA) of a climate/agriculture decision reached within UNFCCC where countries agreed on actions, illustrating that international climate measures are often decisions by states/UN processes, not agency‑enacted laws.

Use this pattern to infer that major policy instruments addressing agriculture/climate come from intergovernmental decisions or national lawmaking, so one should check whether NRL originated from a government or an international agency like FAO.