Skip to main content
SLU publication database (SLUpub)

Report2009

State of biodiversity in the Nordic countries : an assessment of progress towards achieving the target of halting biodiversity loss by 2010

Normander, Bo; Levin, Gregor; Auvinen, Ari-Pekka; Bratli, Harald; Stabbetorp, Odd; Hedblom, Marcus; Glimskär, Anders Ove; Gudmundsson, Gudmundur A.

Abstract

Summary The aim of the NordBio2010 project is to evaluate the 2010 biodiversity target by developing indicators that can describe changes in biodiversity over time in the Nordic countries. We have developed a simple concept to clarify the use of biodiversity indicators; a concept that can describe both the quantity and quality dimensions of biodiversity. Changes in quantity are measured as trends in the area of pre-defined habitats or ecosystems (such as forest, grassland or inland water bodies). Changes in quality are measured as species abundance trends and, when applicable, as other habitat quality parameters, such as trends in the proportion of old trees in forests or grazing pressure on grasslands. In order to measure changes in biodiversity quantity, we have developed a common Nordic habitat classification system that defines a range of ecosystem types. At the 1st level we have defined 10 major habitat types, which at the 2nd level are divided into 27 sub-types. The classification at the 1st level is based on well-defined criteria, including the type and degree of vegetation cover, the type of underlying substrate as well as human influences, such as agricultural management practice. The division into subtypes at the 2nd level is based on a less stringent evaluation of various criteria relevant in a Nordic context. To measure biodiversity quality we have identified a range of species abundance indicators and other quality indicators for each of the main habitat types, and when data sources were sufficient these indicators have been calculated and presented. Based on the concept of measuring both quantity and quality, a two-dimensional biodiversity index can be computed, and such indices are presented for those of the main habitat types (such as farmland, mire and forest) where adequate data exist. Key messages  Our results show that biodiversity has declined in the Nordic countries since 1990.  It is highly unlikely that the target of halting biodiversity loss by 2010 can be met in the Nordic countries.  If further efforts are directed towards analysing existing data sources, additional indicators can be constructed and hence a better knowledge base can be achieved.  We recommend that future nature and biodiversity monitoring be increasingly coordinated at a Nordic level. Our results comprise the most comprehensive documentation of land use in the Nordic countries to date. Based on recent and historic data sources we have been able to deduce key trends in land use. The results show that the area of important nature types such as mire, grassland and heathland have decreased significantly over the past one to two decades, whereas the area of constructed habitats, including city areas and transport networks, has grown considerably in all of the Nordic countries. Each of these individual trends will cause the quantity of biodiversity to decline. On the positive side, however, a slight increase in the area of forest may count as the only trend in land use that may have a positive impact on biodiversity. Looking into the quality aspect of biodiversity, our results reveal that two-thirds of the quality indicators presented show declines and the remaining one-third show improvements (or steady-state). While all of the quality indicators for farmland, mire and grassland show declines in biodiversity, the indicators for constructed and coastal habitats, inland water and forest reveal both positive and negative trends in biodiversity. However, none of the main habitat types exclusively shows improvements. The majority of the species indicators are based on bird populations. Even though birds generally are believed to be highly relevant indictors for biodiversity, they clearly represent only a corner of biodiversity. However, bird species are the best monitored group in the Nordic countries and therefore constitute the best assessment tool for biodiversity. A limited number of population trends also exist for butterflies, mammals and a few plant species, whereas time series are almost non-existent for all remaining species groups. In conjunction with the other indicators, however, the bird indicators selected here represent valuable information on the trend and state of biodiversity in the Nordic countries. In respect to both the quantity and quality dimensions of biodiversity our results indicate an overall decline in biodiversity in the Nordic countries since 1990. In particular, farmland, mire, grassland and heathland show declines in biodiversity, but also the remaining habitats show negative trends. Therefore, based on the findings from this study, we conclude that it is highly unlikely that the target of halting biodiversity loss by 2010 can be achieved by the Nordic countries. Our results should be perceived as a first attempt to make an overall assessment of the state of biodiversity in the Nordic countries. We believe that if further efforts were directed towards scrutinising existing and historic monitoring programmes and data sources, additional indicators could be calculated and hence a better knowledge base would be achieved. Also, our experience is that the monitoring programmes in the Nordic countries vary considerably between the individual countries and as a consequence it is often difficult to find matching datasets in all countries. We recommend that nature and biodiversity monitoring in future be

Published in

TemaNord
2009, number: 2009:509
ISBN: 978-92-893-1825-9
Publisher: Nordic Council of Ministers