Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Type of publication: research article
Type of publication (PDB): Straipsnis Clarivate Analytics Web of Science / Article in Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (S1)
Field of Science: Miškotyra / Forestry (A004)
Author(s): Angelstam, Per;Manton, Michael;Green, Martin;Jonsson, Bengt Gunnar;Mikusiński, Grzegorz;Svensson, Johan;Sabatini, Francesco Maria
Title: Sweden does not meet agreed national and international forest biodiversity targets: A call for adaptive landscape planning
Is part of: Landscape and urban planning Amsterdam: Elsevier B. V., 2020, vol. 202
Extent: p. 1-17
Date: 2020
Keywords: Biodiversity conservation targets;Green infrastructure;Connectivity;Landscape approach;Landscape planning;Land ownership Representativeness
Abstract: Loss of forest naturalness challenges the maintenance of green infrastructure (GI) for biodiversity conservation and delivery of diverse ecosystem services. Using the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Aichi target #11 with its quantitative and qualitative criteria as a normative model, we aim at supporting landscape planning through a pioneering assessment of the extent to which existing amounts and spatial distributions of High Conservation Value Forests (HCVFs) meet these criteria. Highly forested and committed to both intensive wood production and evidence-based conservation targets of 17–20% protected areas, Sweden was chosen as a case study. Specifically, we estimated the amount, regional representation, and functional connectivity of HCVF patches using virtual bird species, validated the results using field surveys of focal bird species, and assessed conservation target fulfilment. Finally, we linked these results to the regional distribution of forest land ownership categories, and stress that these provide different opportunities for landscape planning. Even if 31% of forest land in Sweden is officially protected, voluntarily set-aside, or not used for wood production now and in the future, we show that applying the representation and connectivity criteria of Aichi target #11 reduces this figure to an effective GI of 12%. When disaggregating the five ecoregions the effective GI was 54% for the sub-alpine forest ecoregion, which hosts EU’s last intact forest landscapes, but only 3–8% in the other four ecoregions where wood production is predominant. This results in an increasing need for forest habitat and landscape restoration from north to south. The large regional variation in the opportunity for landscape planning stresses the need for a portfolio of different approaches. We stress the need to secure funding mechanisms for compensating land owners’ investments in GI, and [...]
Affiliation(s): Miškų ir ekologijos fakultetas
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml9.81 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats

CORE Recommender

Citations 5

checked on Apr 3, 2021

Page view(s)

checked on Mar 30, 2021


checked on Mar 31, 2021

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.