Nature for life - Regjeringen.no · 2016. 11. 15. · 2. Climate-resilient nature management 3. Strengthening municipal expertise on biodi-versity 4. Safeguarding threatened species

Chapter 4–9Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment

Norway’s national biodiversity action plan

Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper)

Nature for life


Nature for lifeNorway’s national biodiversity action plan

Translation from Norwegian. For information only.

Contents

Summary .......................................................... 5

4 Indirect drivers of biodiversity loss and general framework .... 9

4.1 Introduction .................................... 94.2 The value of ecosystem goods

and services .................................... 104.3 The EEA Agreement, trade and

investment ...................................... 114.3.1 The EEA Agreement and broader

cooperation with the EU on biodiversity ..................................... 11

4.3.2 Trade and environment ................. 124.3.3 Investments and green markets ... 144.4 Development cooperation ............. 17

5 Sustainable use and good ecological status in ecosystems 19

5.1 Introduction .................................... 195.2 The Nature Diversity Act .............. 205.3 Developing management

objectives for good ecological status ............................................... 21

5.4 Overall land-use management policy ............................................... 23

5.5 Management policy for each of Norway’s major ecosystems ......... 24

5.5.1 Marine and coastal waters ............ 245.5.2 Rivers and lakes ............................. 295.5.3 Wetlands ......................................... 335.5.4 Forest .............................................. 355.5.5 Cultural landscapes ....................... 365.5.6 Mountains ....................................... 375.5.7 Polar ecosystems ........................... 385.6 The management plan for the

Norwegian Sea ............................... 395.6.1 Introduction .................................... 395.6.2 The marine environment –

ecological status and trends in the Norwegian Sea ............................... 39

5.6.3 Patterns of activity and pressures and impacts associated with industrial activities ......................... 41

5.6.4 Value creation and its importance for Norwegian society ................... 42

5.6.5 Assessment of progress towards goals ................................................ 42

5.6.6 Stakeholder participation .............. 425.6.7 Further work on the management

of the Norwegian Sea .................... 42

6 Safeguarding threatened species and habitats ................... 43

6.1 Introduction .................................... 436.2 Safeguarding threatened species . 446.3 Safeguarding threatened habitats . 476.4 Safeguarding threatened species

and habitats in each of Norway’s major ecosystems ........................... 49

6.4.1 Marine and coastal waters ............. 496.4.2 Rivers and lakes .............................. 526.4.3 Wetlands ......................................... 526.4.4 Forest ............................................... 536.4.5 Cultural landscapes ........................ 546.4.6 Mountains ....................................... 556.4.7 Polar ecosystems ............................ 566.5 Genetic resources .......................... 56

7 Conservation of a representative selection of Norwegian nature 58

7.1 Introduction .................................... 587.2 Choice of long-term conservation

measures ......................................... 587.3 Protection of areas in each of

Norway’s major ecosystems .......... 617.3.1 Marine and coastal waters ............. 617.3.2 Rivers and lakes .............................. 617.3.3 Wetlands ......................................... 627.3.4 Forest ............................................... 627.3.5 Cultural landscapes ........................ 637.3.6 Mountains ....................................... 637.3.7 Polar ecosystems ............................ 64

8 Improving knowledge on biodiversity ................................... 65

8.1 Why is knowledge so important? .. 658.2 Mapping biodiversity and

establishing maps of ecological information for Norway ................. 65

8.3 Monitoring ...................................... 678.4 Research and development and

education ......................................... 688.5 Traditional knowledge ................... 718.6 Access to information .................... 738.7 Syntheses, risk assessments and

analyses ........................................... 73

9 Responsibilities of local and regional authorities .................... 75

9.1 Nature as a resource for Norway’s municipalities .................................. 75

9.2 Land-use planning as an instrument for biodiversity management ................................... 75

9.2.1 General application of the Planning and Building Act ............ 75

9.2.2 Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity ..................................... 76

9.3 Municipal capacity, expertise and commitment ............................ 78

9.4 The municipal revenue system ..... 789.5 Guidance on integrating

biodiversity into planning processes ......................................... 79

9.6 Biodiversity in towns and built-up areas ................................................. 80

2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 5Nature for life

Nature for lifeNorway’s national biodiversity action plan

Recommendation of 18 December 2015 from the Ministry of Climate and Environment, approved in the Council of State the same day.

(Government Solberg)

Summary

Why do we need a white paper on biodiversity?

The natural world is the foundation for human lifeand livelihoods. A huge variety of species, habitatsand ecosystems provides us with everything fromfood and medicines to building materials, opportu-nities for outdoor activities and aesthetic andspiritual benefits. Pollination, natural flood controland CO2 uptake are just a few examples of thevariety of ecosystem services that nature pro-vides. Many Norwegian industries are dependenton the environment and natural resources. Nor-wegian outdoor traditions developed from peo-ple’s close contact with the natural world, andhave given rise to activities in other sectors, suchas tourism.

Norway’s previous white paper on biodiversitywas published 14 years ago. A great deal has hap-pened in the intervening years. The preparation ofa new white paper has been a fresh opportunity tolook at the challenges we face as regards biodiver-sity and the priorities, tools and instruments weshould use to safeguard biodiversity.

Biodiversity is essential in the green shift

The Norwegian Government is actively promot-ing a transition to a greener Norwegian economy.

Safeguarding biodiversity for current and futuregenerations is essential to the success of this‘green shift’. The green shift is intended to facili-tate production and consumption patterns thathave far less negative environmental and climateimpact than is the case today. Through conserva-tion and sustainable use, we will seek to maintainthe supply of ecosystem goods and services forthe future.

Biodiversity under pressure globally and in Norway

In recent decades, human activity has resulted inconsiderable losses of biodiversity and causeddeterioration of ecological status in many ecosys-tems. Climate change is adding to the pressure onecosystems. Some of the world’s ecosystems areunder such pressure that they are no longer ableto provide the goods and services on which peo-ple depend.

In many ways, the biodiversity situation inNorway is more positive. But here too, there iswork to be done. Land-use conversion and land-use change are vital for society, for example inconnection with road construction, housing devel-opments and industrial and commercial activities,but is also the most important driver of biodiver-sity loss in terrestrial ecosystems. Ocean acidifica-

6 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016Nature for life

tion, pollution and the spread of alien species areother drivers of biodiversity loss. Climate changeis already affecting Norway’s ecosystems, particu-larly polar ecosystems, and is expected to haveincreasingly negative impacts on other ecosys-tems as well in future.

Healthy ecosystems provide vital goods andservices. Ecosystems consist of many differentorganisms that interact with each other and thephysical environment. Species are the buildingblocks of ecosystems. Habitat loss or degradationmay threaten species or populations with extinc-tion, and the loss of species or populations mayalter ecosystem functioning. Species that are con-sidered to be at risk of extinction are classified asthreatened. In Norway’s latest assessment, 2355species have been classified as threatened. Thiscorresponds to 11.3 % of the approximately 21 000species that were assessed.

National and international targets for biodiversity conservation

The Government’s policy is designed to play apart in achieving national and international tar-gets for biodiversity, particularly the Aichi targetsunder the Convention on Biological Diversity. TheAichi targets are reflected in Norway’s threenational biodiversity targets, which are concernedwith:– achieving good ecological status in ecosys-

tems;– safeguarding threatened species and habitats;– maintaining a representative selection of Nor-

wegian nature (the conservation of areas cov-ering the whole range of habitats and ecosys-tems).

The Aichi targets are global in nature but requireaction at national level. Norway’s contributions inthis field will focus primarily on national action,but we are part of a globalised economy. We areresponsible for the environmental pressure Nor-wegian activities cause outside the country’s bor-ders through trade and investment. Norway’sefforts to reduce pressure from Norwegian activi-ties in other countries are therefore an importantpart of its national policy for biodiversity at globallevel.

Norwegian policy

The Government takes a long-term approach tothe management of Norwegian nature. We mustensure that future generations also have opportu-nities for wealth creation based on healthy ecosys-

tems. The Government will therefore take steps toensure that Norwegian nature is used sustainably,prevent the loss of species and ecosystems, andcontinue efforts for the conservation of a repre-sentative selection of Norwegian nature.

The Government’s policy for biodiversity man-agement in Norway can be summarised under thefollowing main headings:1. More clearly targeted nature management2. Climate-resilient nature management3. Strengthening municipal expertise on biodi-

versity4. Safeguarding threatened species and habitats5. Long-term conservation of a representative

selection of Norwegian nature6. Knowledge-based management7. Adaptation of tools and instruments to the dif-

ferent ecosystems

More clearly targeted nature management

Decisions are constantly being made that requirea balance to be found between biodiversity consid-erations and other important public interests.Overall, the many different decisions that aremade may cause the ecological status of ecosys-tems to deteriorate, which in the long run isunsustainable. At present, there is a lack of clear,agreed management objectives related to ecologi-cal status for several major ecosystems: forests,wetlands, cultural landscapes, mountains, polarecosystems and to some extent marine waters.The Government will initiate the development ofmanagement objectives based on scientific defini-tions of good ecological status for different eco-systems. Once this has been done, it will be possi-ble to target the use of policy instruments moreclearly in order to achieve and maintain thedesired ecological status. The Government’s pro-posals in this area are discussed in Chapter 5.3.For rivers and lakes and coastal waters, a systemof management objectives has already been estab-lished through the Water Management Regula-tions.

Climate-resilient nature management

Climate change will become an increasinglyimportant pressure on biodiversity. This will havea number of implications for nature management.It will be possible to reduce the cumulative envi-ronmental effects by limiting other environmentalpressures. For example, if climate change reducesthe availability of food for certain species so that


they produce fewer young, it may be necessary torestrict harvesting of these species.

The Government will assess whether Nor-way’s existing protected areas will be adequate ifclimate change results in shifts in the geographi-cal distribution of species. Moreover, the Govern-ment will manage Norwegian nature in such away that it can play a part in climate change adap-tation. For example, wetlands can help to moder-ate flooding.

Strengthening municipal expertise on biodiversity

Land conversion and land-use change is the mostimportant driver of biodiversity loss in Norway.Since the municipalities have extensive responsi-bilities for land-use management, it is vital thatthey organise this work in a way that ensuressound management of the natural environment.

The Government will provide a framework toenable the municipalities to build up their exper-tise on biodiversity. It proposes to achieve thisthrough a sound knowledge base and the provi-sion of better guidance, and by initiating a pilotproject on municipal sub-plans for biodiversity asa tool for biodiversity management. The pilot pro-ject will focus on biodiversity of national, regionaland local value.

Chapter 5.4 discusses the main principles ofNorway’s land-use policy. Chapter 9 deals with theresponsibilities of local and regional authorities,which include responsibility for biodiversity intowns and built-up areas.

Safeguarding threatened species and habitats

One of Norway’s national targets is to ensure thatno species or habitats are lost as a result of thecumulative effects of human activity. Special safe-guards will continue to apply to threatened spe-cies and habitats when decisions are made undersectoral legislation and in connection with land-use planning. Protection of areas under theNature Diversity Act, priority species and selectedhabitat types are instruments the Governmentwill use to safeguard threatened species and habi-tats.

The Government’s first priority will be speciesthat are critically endangered or endangered inNorway and also have a substantial proportion oftheir population in Norway. Some species are criti-cally endangered or endangered not only in Nor-way but also in the rest of Europe or globally.There is even more urgent reason to take steps tosafeguard such species. Chapter 6 deals with the

Government’s policy for threatened species andhabitats.

Long-term conservation of a representative selection of Norwegian nature

The long-term conservation of a selection of Nor-wegian nature has been part of Norway’s policyfor many years. Area-based measures to achievethis include the national park plan, county protec-tion plans, the protection plan for watercourses,the designation of key forest biotopes that are notto be felled, and the protection of coral reefsagainst fisheries.

The Government will ensure that the value ofconservation areas is maintained through soundmanagement. The Government will also considerwhether the areas concerned are sufficiently rep-resentative of the whole range of Norwegiannature. The Government will expand the scope ofvoluntary forest protection and continue work onmarine protected areas. Some other habitat types,particularly in the lowlands, are also poorly repre-sented. The Government will initiate county-levelsupplementary protection of areas under theNature Diversity Act, and will test protection on avoluntary basis in ecosystems other than forest.Application of the Marine Resources Act will alsobe considered.

Chapter 7 deals with the Government’s policyfor conservation of a representative selection ofNorwegian nature.

Knowledge-based management

One of the principles of Norway’s environmentalpolicy is that management must be knowledge-based. The Government will therefore continueinitiatives to map Norwegian nature and establishmaps of ecological information for Norway. TheGovernment also proposes further developmentof the environmental monitoring system to ensuresatisfactory monitoring of all ecosystems, and fur-ther development of good indicators for pressuresand ecosystem services.

Other forms of knowledge generation, forexample research, analyses and syntheses, willalso be further developed and improved. New edi-tions of the Norwegian Nature Index, red lists andecological risk assessments for alien species willbe presented regularly. To ensure that decisionmakers and the general public have adequateinformation about what knowledge is available,databases will be improved and coordinated. Envi-


ronmental data and statistics will be of good qual-ity and will be available in public databases.

Adaptation of tools and instruments to the different ecosystems

Every ecosystem is different. The environmentalpressures affecting them vary, and the tools andinstruments used to safeguard them must beadapted accordingly. The Government’s mainprinciples for safeguarding biodiversity are thesame for all ecosystems, but this white paper setsout proposals for adapting the use of tools and pol-icy instruments to different major ecosystems:marine and coastal waters, rivers and lakes, wet-lands, forest, cultural landscapes, mountains andpolar ecosystems. These include proposals forachieving or maintaining good ecological status indifferent ecosystems (Chapter 5), safeguardingthreatened species and habitats (Chapter 6) andconservation of a representative selection of Nor-wegian nature (Chapter 7).

The marine management plans and the riverbasin management plans are tools for ecosystem-based management of marine and coastal watersand rivers and lakes. Sectoral legislation and thePlanning and Building Act are used to regulateactivities that can put pressure on biodiversity. Itis a principle of Norwegian environmental policythat each sector is responsible for dealing withpressures and impacts resulting from its ownactivities. Instruments such as priority species,selected habitat types and area-based protectionare relevant in all ecosystems, but can only beused out to twelve nautical miles from the baselinein sea areas, since this is the limit for the geo-graphical scope of the relevant provisions in theNature Diversity Act.

Note to the reader: Chapter 1–3 describe the needfor a national biodiversity action plan, the state ofNorway’s ecosystems and achievement of theAichi-targets. These chapters have not been trans-lated into English.


4 Indirect drivers of biodiversity loss and general framework

4.1 Introduction

The loss of biodiversity must be considered fromboth a global and a national perspective. Pres-sures on some of the world’s ecosystems are hav-ing such serious negative impacts that they are nolonger able to deliver the goods and services ormaintain the natural processes on which peopledepend.

At the same time, living conditions for peopleacross the world are improving. According to theUN,1 the world population is projected to rise to9.6 billion in 2050, while at the same time largepopulation groups will need to be lifted out of pov-erty. Globally, the number of people in the middleclass is projected to rise from about 1.8 billion in2008 to 4.9 billion by 2030.2 World energy demandis expected to rise by about 50 % up to 2050.3 Inthemselves, these trends will improve people’swelfare, but they will also intensify pressure onthe natural environment at both national and inter-national level, through processes such as land-usechange and climate change. The World EconomicForum report Global Risks 2015 identifies climate-related risks and biodiversity loss and ecosystemcollapse among the top risks that may have animpact on macroeconomic developments in theyears ahead.

The European environment – state and outlook2015, published by the European EnvironmentAgency,4 lists three characteristics that are com-mon to many of the environmental challenges fac-ing Europe today. Firstly, they directly and indi-rectly affect human health and well-being, as wellas prosperity and standards of living. Secondly,people are responsible for their existence, since

these environmental challenges are intrinsicallylinked to our consumption and resource use pat-terns. And thirdly, they are closely interwoven, sothat the existence of one environmental problemmay exacerbate the effects of others. Their evolu-tion also depends on European and global trends,including those related to demographics, eco-nomic growth, trade patterns, technological pro-gress and international cooperation. Internationalcooperation is therefore vital if we are to resolveglobal and European environmental problems.

Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodi-versity 2011–2020 adopted by the Convention onBiological Diversity is the world community’smost important tool for safeguarding biodiversity.In 2014, a mid-term evaluation of progress so farwas published in Global Biodiversity Outlook 4.This report describes some significant progressbut finds that a great deal still remains to be doneto achieve the plan’s targets.

The complex nature of the environmental chal-lenges facing us means that a wide range of policyinstruments and processes of change will beneeded to address them. In the short term, tack-ling biodiversity-related problems will require pol-icy instruments and action that can give resultsrapidly where the threats are most serious, forexample if species or habitats are at risk of extinc-tion or destruction. In addition, it is vital to stimu-late processes of social change that address theunderlying causes of biodiversity loss and willhave long-term effects.

The European environment – state and outlook2015 and other reports5 indicate that neither envi-ronmental policies alone nor economic and tech-nology-driven efficiency gains are likely to be suf-ficient to achieve the vision set out in the EU’s 7thEnvironment Action Programme: ‘In 2050, we livewell, within the planet’s ecological limits.’ Achiev-ing this will require fundamental changes in pro-duction and consumption systems, which are themain drivers of the growing pressure on the envi-

1 Medium-variant projection as published in: United Nations,Department of Economic and Social Affairs, PopulationDivision (2013). World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revi-sion, Highlights and Advance Tables. Working Paper No.ESA/P/WP.228.

2 Kharas, Homi. The emerging middle class in developingcountries. Working paper 185. Paris: OECD, 2010.

3 There is uncertainty associated with all these prognoses.4 EEA, 2015, The European environment – state and outlook

2015: synthesis report, European Environment Agency,Copenhagen

5 OECD (2012), OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050,OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264122246-en


ronment. And this in turn will necessitate pro-found changes in dominant institutions, practices,technologies, policies, lifestyles and thinking.

Unless we devise more resource-efficient pro-duction and consumption systems, in other wordssystems that reduce greenhouse gas emissions,material use and environmental pressures, thecumulative environmental effects will becomemore and more serious, and will hinder growthand improvements in welfare. A transition to agreener society, often called the ‘green shift’,denotes a transformation process to create a soci-ety where production and consumption have farless negative environmental and climate impactthan today. This is both part of sustainable devel-opment and an essential basis for it, and ecologi-cal sustainability is an essential concern here.

The Aichi targets are global in nature butrequire action at national level. Norway’s contri-butions in this field will focus primarily on nationalaction, but we are part of a globalised economyand must take responsibility for the environmen-tal pressure Norwegian activities cause outsidethe country’s borders through trade and invest-ment. Aichi targets 1, 2, 3 and 4 (under strategicgoal A) are important in this context. Theyinclude raising people’s awareness of the value ofbiodiversity, sustainable production and consump-tion, and developing and reporting on systems toensure that the whole range of biodiversity valuesis incorporated into planning and nationalaccounting systems. According to the targets, ‘by2020, at the latest, governments, business andstakeholders at all levels have taken steps toachieve or have implemented plans for sustaina-ble production and consumption and have keptthe impacts of use of natural resources well withinsafe ecological limits.’ This means that authorities,the business sector and other stakeholders inNorway too must take steps to ensure that pro-duction and consumption are sustainable andwithin safe ecological limits – both within Norwayand abroad.

It is an important principle that states have aresponsibility for the environmental impacts theiractivities have in other countries. This followsfrom international law, and is specifically men-tioned in the Convention on Biological Diversity.Article 3 establishes that states have ‘the sover-eign right to exploit their own resources pursuantto their own environmental policies’, but also thatthey have the ‘responsibility to ensure that activi-ties within their jurisdiction or control do notcause damage to the environment of other Statesor of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdic-

tion.’ Moreover, the Convention states that, sub-ject to the rights of other states, its provisionsapply to processes and activities carried out underthe jurisdiction or control of a party to the Con-vention, regardless of where their effects occur(Article 4(b)).

Businesses can help to reduce environmentalpressure by improving their environmental per-formance and making efficient use of resources.Companies can develop processes and technolo-gies to make more efficient use of scarceresources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.Ensuring that suppliers and the entire value chainmeet high environmental standards is an impor-tant element of corporate environmental responsi-bility. This applies to all companies, regardless oftheir ownership structure.6

4.2 The value of ecosystem goods and services

The value of nature, and thus the cost to society ofenvironmental degradation, is often not readilyapparent. Countries’ national accounts and calcu-lations of the national wealth do not include envi-ronmental resources. The prices of goods and ser-vices will not reflect the environmental costs asso-ciated with their production and consumptionunless policy instruments are used to change this.The true value of nature thus tends to be underes-timated in private and public decision-making pro-cesses, particularly if it takes a long time beforeany damage becomes apparent or if the damage iscaused in a distant part of the world.

International initiatives have therefore beentaken to develop methods for demonstrating andraising awareness of the value of ecosystem ser-vices (both those with a market price and thosewithout) in various types of decision-making pro-cesses and documents. The Government will con-tinue Norway’s active participation in this work,for example in the UN system (UNEP and the UNStatistics Division), the World Bank, the OECD,the EU and the Nordic Council of Ministers.

Even though many people in Norway areknowledgeable about biodiversity and its value,knowledge about nature, the state of ecosystemsand pressures on them nationally and internation-ally can still be improved among both decision

6 Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014) Diverse and value-creating owners-hip, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, www.reg-jeringen.no


makers and the general public. Knowledge needsand related action are discussed in Chapter 8.

The Government will:

• Promote the development of methods, indicatorsand models to demonstrate the values associatedwith biodiversity and ecosystem services from amacroeconomic perspective.

• Raise the awareness of the general public, deci-sion makers and the business sector about thepossible implications for society of changes in eco-systems at national and global level.

• Contribute to international ef forts under the UNStatistics Division to continue to develop and testthe system of environmental-economic accoun-ting, and consider whether to incorporate thisinto Norway’s reporting and accounting systems.

• Develop better methods for integrating the wholerange of values associated with biodiversity andecosystem services (both those with a marketvalue and those without) into economic analysesand decision-making processes at dif ferent levels.

• Continue international cooperation to highlightand value ecosystem services; this includes conti-nuing the development of qualitative, quantita-tive and monetary approaches to valuation.

4.3 The EEA Agreement, trade and investment

4.3.1 The EEA Agreement and broader cooperation with the EU on biodiversity

The EU plays a leading role as regards environ-mental policy, and much of the EU’s environmen-tal legislation is incorporated into Norwegian lawthrough the Agreement on the European Eco-nomic Area (EEA Agreement). Legislation onnature management, including the Birds and Hab-itats Directives, is not part of the EEA Agreement.However, some EU legislation with importantimplications for biodiversity has been incorpo-rated into the Agreement, including the WaterFramework Directive and the Directive on thedeliberate release into the environment of geneti-cally modified organisms. The EEA Agreementalso includes a range of legal acts relating to theclimate and environment, and these play a part inreducing pressure on the environment. Theyinclude legislation on waste, chemicals and air pol-lution. Norway’s participation in EU processes, itscooperation with the EU and its influence on EUenvironmental policy through the EEA Agree-

ment are thus important as regards biodiversitytoo. A large body of harmonised food law (includ-ing food safety, animal health and intermediateinputs) has also been established through theEEA Agreement. Norway’s animal health legisla-tion is fully harmonised with EU law. It includeslegislation on disease control and on trade in liveanimals and animal products within the EEA andwith non-EEA countries.

Norway and the EU also cooperate closely inglobal and regional biodiversity initiatives, forexample through the system of EEA and NorwayGrants. This includes projects relating to imple-mentation of the Convention on Biological Diver-sity and to mapping and assessing the economicvalue of ecosystem services.

Improving resource efficiency is one elementof the EU’s efforts to develop a circular economy.Greater resource efficiency is also vital to the suc-cess of efforts to reduce pressure on species andecosystems to a sustainable level. The aim of a cir-cular economy is to maintain the value of materi-als and energy along the value chain, thus mini-mising waste and resource use. By avoiding a lossof value along material flows, it is possible to cre-ate sustainable economic opportunities and com-petitive advantages.

The European Commission has announcedthat an EU action plan for the circular economywill be presented towards the end of 2015. The EUhas indicated that specific, binding proposals forrevision of the waste legislation will be put for-ward. These will include requirements for morerecycling and re-use to improve resource effi-ciency and reduce environmental pressure and atthe same time promote economic growth andemployment. The proposals will also be designedto contribute to the achievement of the EU’s cli-mate targets and to reduce its dependence onimports of raw materials from outside the Union.

In summer 2015, Norway submitted its contri-bution to the consultation on the Commission’saction plan for the circular economy, and amongother things highlighted consumer and productpolicy, waste and chemicals policy and green pub-lic procurement.

Norway also pointed out that developing anon-toxic circular economy requires coherencebetween the legislation on chemicals, waste andproducts. We consider it important to ensure satis-factory consumer rights and legal guarantees, par-ticularly as regards the durability of products. It isimportant to develop good indicators and meth-ods that cover the entire life cycle of products inorder to reduce their environmental and carbon


footprint. Effective national waste management isa key instrument for preventing marine litter. Nor-way also gives high priority to action to reducefood waste, including cooperation with the foodindustry.

Strategic use of public procurement to driveprogress towards overall policy goals was animportant reason for developing the new EU pro-curement legislation. With the new legislation,member states have a better instrument forachieving the goals of the Europe 2020 strategyfor ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’. Thenew legislation encourages wider use of greenprocurement than before. It is a new developmentthat the EU is promoting strategic use of procure-ment and clearly defining procurement as aninstrument for achieving overall social goals. Nor-way plans to implement the new legislation in Nor-wegian law during the first six months of 2016.

One of the goals of the EU’s 7th EnvironmentAction Programme is to protect nature andstrengthen ecological resilience. The programmeis a common strategy that provides an overallframework for EU policy and priorities. It sets outcommon objectives that are to underpin the devel-opment of new policy and the implementation ofexisting legislation. The 7th Environment ActionProgramme was adopted by the EU in 2014 and isbeing incorporated into Protocol 31 of the EEAAgreement.

The first thematic priority of the programmedeals with ‘natural capital’, which includes vitalservices such as pollination of plants, natural pro-tection against flooding, and climate regulation.

Through the EEA and Norway Grants, Nor-way is contributing to the reduction of social andeconomic disparities in the EEA. Under theseschemes, grants can be awarded to funds and pro-grammes that have clear goals and use results-based management. In the period 2009–2014,Norway allocated a total of EUR 550 million to theprogramme areas environmental protection andmanagement, climate change and renewableenergy, and green industry innovation. Fundinghas for example been granted for projects to stepup work on climate change mitigation and adapta-tion, improve the management of marine andinland waters, biodiversity and ecosystems, safe-guard the cultural heritage, strengthen environ-mental monitoring and improve the managementof chemicals and hazardous waste. About EUR 65million was allocated to projects on biodiversitymanagement and ecosystem services. Adaptationto climate change is also a key funding area. Cli-mate, energy and environment will also be among

the top priorities in the next funding period, whichruns from 2014 to 2021.

The European Environment Agency describesits mission as ‘to support sustainable developmentand to help achieve significant and measurableimprovement in Europe’s environment throughthe provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reli-able information to policymaking agents and thepublic.’ Norway and 32 other European countriesare members of the Agency, which is an importantinformation source for those involved in develop-ing, adopting, implementing and evaluating envi-ronmental policy.


• Through continued cooperation with the EU andthe European Environment Agency, supply dataand report on indicators in such a way that theinformation on status and trends for Norwegianbiodiversity in relevant European compilationsof environmental information is comparable tothat available from other sources.

• Contribute to the EU’s work on development ofthe circular economy where relevant, parti-cularly as regards waste, chemicals and productpolicy.

4.3.2 Trade and environment

Introduction

In accordance with its political platform, the Nor-wegian Government is promoting freer trade andpursuing an active trade policy that emphasisesNorway’s national interests. Trade agreementsprovide an opportunity to shape the course of glo-balisation through international cooperation. TheGovernment’s objective is to maintain and developa trade framework that maximises Norwegianvalue creation while at the same time contributingto global growth and sustainable development.

In recent decades, Norway’s ties to othercountries have become even closer, throughtrade, labour migration and capital flows. Produc-tion and consumption are increasingly takingplace in a global market with global supply chains.The international trade in goods and servicesmakes it possible to specialise and thus contributeto better use of resources and greater productiv-ity.

Norway has an open economy and a consider-able volume of trade with other countries. About30 % of domestic demand is met through imports.Norwegian production and consumption there-


fore have an influence on the exploitation ofnature in other parts of the world.

The multilateral trading system includes vari-ous provisions allowing countries to take steps toimplement a sound environmental and climatepolicy. For example, it is possible to introduce sub-sidies, prohibitions, restrictions and labelling sys-tems, provided that such measures are in accord-ance with trade rules. Measures may be intro-duced at national, regional or international level.

Sustainable fisheries

Norway is one of the countries that has beenadvocating the development of effective rulesunder the World Trade Organization (WTO) toprohibit fisheries subsidies that contribute tooverfishing, excess capacity and illegal, unre-ported and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing).Norway also played an active role in work underthe Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN(FAO) resulting in the conclusion of the global

agreement on port state measures. The EU hasadopted a Regulation to prevent, deter and elimi-nate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing,and Norway has entered into a bilateral agree-ment with the EU to implement the same rules.Fisheries management is not part of the EEAAgreement, but Norway has close, broad coopera-tion with the EU on the management of pelagicfish stocks and shared stocks in the North Sea.Considerable progress has been made in this fieldin recent years.

Trade in threatened species

The Convention on International Trade in Endan-gered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) isintended to ensure that trade in species to which itapplies is sustainable. Trade in these species isorganised through a licensing system, withlicences issued by national authorities. CITES spe-cies are placed on one of three lists, depending onhow seriously threatened they are by interna-

Figure 4.1 Trade opens up access to a wider selection of products. The world’s genetic resources are the origin of almost all the food we eat.

Photo: Svein Magne Fredriksen


tional trade. In all, about 35 000 species are cur-rently listed, about 1000 of them in Appendix I,which puts the strictest restrictions on trade.

The Convention was implemented in Norwe-gian law by the Regulations of 15 November 2002No. 1276. New regulations are being drawn upwhich in some respects will go beyond the mini-mum requirements of the convention. The regula-tions will also implement decisions made by theConference of the Parties after the adoption of thecurrent regulations, and will widen their scope toinclude keeping or possession and trade withinNorway.

Globalisation and trade

By trading with and investing in other countries,Norway is contributing to a global division oflabour in the production of goods and services.Norwegian companies are increasingly turningtowards and becoming established in new growthmarkets, which may be in countries where gov-ernance is weak and the environmental legislationis poorly developed. This trend is bringing abouteconomic growth and improvements in welfare,but is also causing growth in production, con-sumption and transport. The latter may increasepressure on the environment, for examplethrough heavier use of scarce natural resources,releases of greenhouse gases and pollutants andthe spread of alien species. However, internationaltrade and investment can also promote more cli-mate friendly and environmentally sound develop-ment, for instance by deploying more effectiveand greener technology and encouraging the loca-tion of different forms of production in areaswhere they will put least pressure on the environ-ment. In principle, there is thus no contradictionbetween an open world trading system and asound climate and environmental policy.

Like EU treaties and law, the EEA Agreementincludes a wide range of provisions designed topromote conservation and sustainable use ofnature. Trade agreements are increasingly incor-porating environmental provisions, for example inthe form of separate chapters on trade and sus-tainable development. Norway and the EuropeanFree Trade Association (EFTA) have decided thata trade and sustainable development chaptershould be part of the standard model for freetrade agreements. Norway is also playing anactive part in the negotiations on the Environmen-tal Goods Agreement, which is intended to pro-mote trade in environmental goods and if possiblealso related services.

A white paper on globalisation and trade pub-lished in 2015 (Meld. St. 29 (2014–2015)) dis-cusses the interactions between trade policy andclimate and environment. It is crucial that boththe international trade regime and Norway’s freetrade agreements promote green growth and takeclimate change and environmental considerationsinto account. The international trade regime canplay a role in facilitating more environmentallysound and climate-friendly development. It canalso advance the ‘green shift’ by promotingincreased trade in environmental goods and ser-vices and by reducing unnecessary barriers tosuch trade. Trade commitments must be designedto take into account countries’ need to implementeffective environmental and climate policies, andmust facilitate green growth. Policy instrumentsthat can be used in this connection include neces-sary climate and environmental standards, envi-ronmental taxes on goods and services, informa-tion and labelling requirements, environmentalsubsidies and facilitation of increased trade in cli-mate and environmentally friendly goods and ser-vices. At the same time, it is important that coun-tries are not permitted to unilaterally implementdiscriminatory or protectionist measures thatunnecessarily obstruct trade.


• Continue to include a separate chapter on tradeand sustainable development in the free tradeagreements Norway enters into, as a contribu-tion to achieving international biodiversity tar-gets.

• Support efforts to combat environmental crime,including fisheries-related crime, among otherthings through relevant international processesand programmes.

4.3.3 Investments and green markets

Introduction

Norway has substantial financial investmentsabroad, held both by the Government and by pri-vate investors. Most of these investments are inEurope and North America (about 80 % of theGovernment Pension Fund Global and 70 % of for-eign direct investments).

There is no clear definition of the term ‘greeninvestments’. According to the OECD, greengrowth means fostering economic growth anddevelopment while at the same time ensuring thatnatural assets continue to provide the resources


and environmental services on which our well-being relies.7 Green investments can therefore beunderstood as investments that promote greengrowth, including investments that are made tak-ing into consideration environmental issues in thebroad sense (including greenhouse gas emis-sions, air pollution, chemicals, biodiversity andwaste management).

Actors in the financial sector, both in Norwayand abroad, have shown growing interest in greenand sustainable investments in recent years. Atthe UN Climate Summit in New York in Septem-ber 2014, a new coalition of institutional investorswas launched. Their goal is to substantiallyreduce the carbon footprint of their portfolios byDecember 2015. In the past year, several pensionfunds have been reducing their allocation to coaland petroleum and shifting their assets towardsgreen investments. Several of the funds havehighlighted the fact that manging environmentalrisk and making use of opportunities for greeninvestment are vital considerations in their invest-ment decisions.8

Private-sector investments

Environmental risk in the financial sector includesthe risk that environmental problems themselves,or restructuring of environmental policy involvingstricter regulation or substantially higher carbonprices, will influence economic developments andfinancial variables in the future.

Actors in the financial sector have been payinggrowing attention to climate and environmentalissues in recent years. For example, institutionalinvestors are to a greater degree assessing anddisclosing the environmental risk associated withtheir portfolios. One system they can use is devel-oped by CDP (formerly the Carbon DisclosureProject), an independent, not-for-profit organisa-tion that collects and publishes environmentalinformation on companies, including their green-house gas emissions, contribution to deforestationand water consumption. Identifying the environ-mental pressure caused by different parts of the

supply chain can help companies to manage envi-ronmental risk better.

The white paper Diverse and value-creatingownership (Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014)) describeswhat the Norwegian Government expects interms of responsible corporate governance,including environmental responsibility, from com-panies in which the state has an ownership inter-est. All Norwegian companies, regardless ofwhether they are privately or publicly owned andof whether they operate in Norway or abroad, areexpected to apply good corporate governancepractices. The white paper emphasises that theGovernment expects companies in which thestate has an ownership interest to work systemati-cally on corporate governance and seek to be atthe forefront in their respective fields. The corpo-rate environmental responsibility of the businesssector involves ensuring that environmental andresource use considerations, including the pres-sure a company puts on the environment, are inte-grated into financial decision making. In additionto complying with national and international envi-ronmental standards, companies should take aproactive approach in order to reduce the adverseenvironmental impacts of their operations beyondwhat is stipulated in such standards.

According to the white paper on private sectordevelopment in Norwegian development coopera-tion (Meld. St. 35 (2014–2015)), the Governmentwishes to provide strong support to Norwegiancompanies abroad, and is stepping up the effortsto assist companies in new, demanding markets.As part of this support, guidance, dialogue andpractical cooperation on challenges posed by localframework conditions and governance issues arebeing strengthened.

A number of cooperation forums have beenestablished by and for the private sector with theaim of building knowledge and developing sys-tems to address challenges related to biodiversity.Within the EU, this work is being organised underthe European Business and Biodiversity Platform.The Natural Capital Coalition (formerly the TEEBfor Business Coalition) is a global cooperationforum where the business sector can cooperate tosafeguard natural capital, for example by raisingawareness of the impacts on business of loss ofnatural capital. The coalition is seeking to bringabout a shift in corporate behaviour and thusavoid unsustainable use of natural resources. Thecoalition is developing a Natural Capital Protocoland systems for natural capital disclosure and riskassessments.

7 Inderst, G., Kaminker, Ch., Stewart, F. (2012), Defining andMeasuring Green Investments: Implications for InstitutionalInvestors’ Asset Allocations, OECD Working Papers onFinance, Insurance and Private Pensions, No.24, OECDPublishing; OECD (2011) Towards green growth – A sum-mary for policy makers, OECD Publishing, Paris.

8 See for example UNEP et. al (2014) Financial Institutionstaking action on Climate Change http://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/documents/FinancialInstitutionsTakingAction-OnClimateChange.pdf


The Government Pension Fund Global

The overriding goal for investments by the Gov-ernment Pension Fund Global is to obtain thehighest possible returns at moderate risk. TheFund’s position as a long-term investor with abroad global portfolio of equities, bonds and realestate means that climate change and climate pol-icy measures may have implications for portfolioreturn in future. Climate change has thereforebeen a key area in the management of the Fundfor a long time. Climate change can also beincluded as one element of a broader risk assess-ment of business models and the long-term sus-tainability of companies in which the Fund hasinvested.

About 6 % of the value of the Fund’s bench-mark index for equity investments, which at theend of the first six months of 2015 correspondedto about NOK 260 billion, is in companies thatobtain more than 20 % of their return from envi-ronment-related activities, including renewableenergy. In principle, the Fund’s equity invest-ments in environment-related companies willincrease if their share of the world’s equity marketrises.

In 2009, it was decided to establish environ-ment-related mandates for the Fund. They havethe same risk and return requirements as theFund’s other investments. In the white paper TheManagement of the Government Pension Fund in2014 (Meld. St. 21 (2014–2015)), the Governmentproposed that the upper limit for such invest-ments should be raised to NOK 30–60 billion. TheStorting (Norwegian parliament) endorsed thiswhen it considered the white paper.

In the same white paper, the Government pro-posed a new conduct-based criterion for observa-tion and exclusion from the Fund’s portfolio. Thisis an ethical criterion, and applies if there is anunacceptable risk that companies contribute to orare responsible for ‘acts or omissions that on anaggregate company level lead to unacceptablegreenhouse gas emissions’. This proposal wasalso endorsed by the Storting when it consideredthe white paper. In the 2016 Norwegian budget,the Government followed up a recommendation tothe Storting (Innst. 290 S (2014–2015)) on thewhite paper, in which the standing committeeasked the Government to propose a new product-based criterion for observation and exclusionfrom the Fund’s portfolio for mining companiesand power producers that base a substantial pro-portion of their operations on thermal coal (coalthat is used for energy production). In the 2016

budget, this criterion was worded as follows:‘Observation or exclusion may be decided formining companies and power producers whichthemselves or through entities they control derive30 % or more of their income from thermal coal orbase 30 % or more of their operations on thermalcoal’.

A white paper giving an account of the man-agement of the Government Pension Fund Globalis published each year during the spring parlia-mentary session.

Green bonds

The green bond concept was developed in 2008 bythe World Bank and the Swedish bank SEB.These bonds are intended specifically to raise cap-ital to fund environmentally sound investments.The market for green bonds is growing rapidly9,but is still a very small proportion of the totalworld market for bonds. In 2014, USD 36.6 billionwas issued in green bonds, three times as muchas in 2013.

Several different analysts have pointed outthat it may be an attractive proposition for institu-tional investors to make long-term investments ininfrastructure, including in environment-relatedsectors.10 Green bonds are a type of financialinstrument that to a large extent targets institu-tional investors, and can therefore be an impor-tant way of expanding environmentally soundinvestments. However, the environmental profileof the green bonds that have been issued is dis-puted, since there is as yet no specific standard orclear definition of what is meant by ‘green bonds’.It is up to the issuer to label bonds as ‘green’ andto provide information on how funds are used.Several independent bodies currently provideevaluations of green bonds, and Norwegian bod-ies include CICERO and DNV GL. In addition, theGreen Bond Principles provide guidelines clarify-ing which bonds can be called ‘green bonds’. Ithas been questioned whether issuing green bondsresults in more investment in environmentallysound projects than would have been the case ifthey were not labelled as ‘green’. In January 2015,the Oslo Stock Exchange published separate listsof green bonds, and was the first stock exchangein the world to do so.

9 OECD Mapping channels to mobilise institutional invest-ments in sustainable energy, 2015

10 Kaminker, C. et al. (2013), Institutional Investors andGreen Infrastructure Investments: Selected Case Studies,OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and PrivatePensions, No. 35, OECD Publishing


Green equity indices

A number of equity indices focus on climate- andenvironment-related sectors, but because ‘green’is not a clearly defined term, they use a number ofdifferent approaches. However, one common fea-ture has been that the composition of these indi-ces has changed considerably over time, which ispartly a reflection of the dynamic nature of thismarket segment and the high level of risk.


• Encourage and provide opportunities for theNorwegian business sector to take part in Euro-pean and international cooperation to safeguardbiodiversity.

4.4 Development cooperation

Aichi target 2 is for biodiversity values to be inte-grated into development and poverty reduction

strategies and planning processes. It also appliesto Norwegian development cooperation.

Norwegian aid contributes to the conservationof biodiversity in a number of ways, both throughspecific programmes and through the integrationof biodiversity considerations into developmentcooperation as a whole. This topic is discussed inthe annual budget proposal from the Ministry ofForeign Affairs. The Government’s objective is forNorway to play a leading role in role in integratingenvironmental issues into development coopera-tion and to play a part in the green shift interna-tionally.

Norway is a key supporter of programmes thatinvolve systematic competence building in devel-oping countries in the fields of green economy,knowledge-based nature management and toolsfor green industrial development.

Norway’s International Climate and Forest Ini-tiative is seeking to reduce greenhouse gas emis-sions from deforestation and forest degradation indeveloping countries. Important rainforest coun-tries are therefore key partners, and Brazil, Guy-

Figure 4.2 Tropical rainforests contain a large proportion of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity. Rain-forests also play a vital part in regulating climate and moderating climate change. Norway is contributing to rainforest conservation through its International Climate and Forest Initiative.

Photo: Thomas Martens, Rainforest Foundation Norway


ana and Indonesia have received most funding sofar. The main approach used by the Climate andForest Initiative is to pay for emission reductionsin countries that succeed in reducing deforesta-tion and forest degradation. Given the huge value

of biodiversity in forests in developing countries,and particularly rainforests, the Climate and For-est Initiative is also considered to be a very impor-tant instrument for safeguarding biodiversity.


5 Sustainable use and good ecological status in ecosystems

5.1 Introduction

The Government’s main approach in its biodiver-sity strategy is to ensure that the nature manage-ment regime is sustainable, so that the overallpressure resulting from human activities and useof nature allows Norwegian ecosystems to main-tain good ecological status over time as far as pos-sible. This is the main theme of Chapter 5. Otherimportant approaches to safeguarding biodiver-sity in Norway are action to protect threatenedspecies and habitat types (Chapter 6) and the con-servation of a representative selection of Norwe-gian nature for future generations (Chapter 7).

Many of the Aichi targets are essentially con-cerned with maintaining well-functioning ecosys-tems or improving ecological status, particularlynumbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14 and 15. The Strate-gic Plan for Biodiversity calls for action to ensurethat ‘ecosystems are resilient and continue to pro-vide essential services’ and that ‘biologicalresources are sustainably used’, and its targetsinclude action to restore degraded ecosystemsand maintain the integrity and functioning of eco-systems. These aims are reflected in one of Nor-way’s national environmental targets for biodiver-sity, which is that ‘Norwegian ecosystems willachieve good status and deliver ecosystem ser-vices’.1

The target of achieving good ecological statusis based on the fundamental idea that well-func-tioning ecosystems benefit society as a whole, andthat we have an obligation to pass on healthy eco-systems to future generations. The objects clauseof Norway’s Nature Diversity Act also highlightsthe importance of the environment as a basis forhuman activity, culture (including Sami culture),health and well-being.

Healthy ecosystems are also of decisive impor-tance for nature’s capacity to provide ecosystemservices that human society depends on, such aspollination of food plants, climate regulation, floodcontrol and clean drinking water. These are vital

for human survival, for supplies of food and otherraw materials, and for maintaining strong primaryindustries. Sustainable forestry, fisheries, aqua-culture and agriculture depend on well-function-ing ecosystems. Industries that use active sub-stances, enzymes and genetic code from biologi-cal material to manufacture medicines, foodstuffsand other products are also responsible for sub-stantial value creation. Moreover, healthy ecosys-tems are important for public health, for exampleby providing people with opportunities for emo-tional and aesthetic experience and for engagingin outdoor activities.

In connection with administrative decisions, itis necessary to find a balance between costs andbenefits. In many cases, other public interests areconsidered so important that activities or develop-ments that will disturb the natural environmentare permitted. In other cases, the weight given toother public interests may mean that it is acceptedthat parts of an ecosystem will not achieve goodecological status. In addition, pressures that arenot under national control, such as climatechange, ocean acidification and long-range trans-port of pollutants, may make it impossible toachieve good ecological status in all parts of eco-systems.

In general, the status of Norway’s ecosystemsis relatively good. A great deal has already beendone to safeguard the natural environment, andNorway has introduced a wide range of legal andeconomic instruments that can be used in build-ing up a sound, ecosystem-based managementsystem. The most important legal instruments arethe Planning and Building Act and sectoral legisla-tion such as the Water Resources Act, the Water-course Regulation Act, the Energy Act, the Pollu-tion Control Act, the Svalbard Environmental Pro-tection Act, the Marine Resources Act, the Aqua-culture Act, the Petroleum Act, the Forestry Actand the Land Act, applied together with theNature Diversity Act. Norway thus has a soundlegislative basis for sustainable nature manage-ment. The Ministry of Climate and Environmenthas commissioned a report on experience gainedduring the first few years of the application of the

1 Norway’s environmental targets in English are listed here:http://www.environment.no/goals/


Nature Diversity Act, and Chapters 6, 8 and 9include some proposals for follow-up measures toimprove the application of the Act and make itmore effective. The Government also proposessome changes in the application of other legisla-tion for the same purpose, for example amend-ments to regulations, changes in the weighting tobe used when making individual decisions, andimprovements in the guidance provided. When itconsiders the need for new economic instrumentsor changes to existing instruments, the Govern-ment will primarily consider the recommenda-tions of the Green Tax Commission. Further infor-mation can be found in the sections of this whitepaper on individual ecosystems, and in Chapter 9on the roles and responsibilities of the municipali-ties and counties.

However, Norway still has work to do in thisfield. One problem for the Norwegian authoritiesis the lack of clear, agreed management objectivesfor ‘good ecological status’ in most ecosystems,even though ‘sustainable’ management is speci-fied as a goal in a number of statutes. The excep-tions are coastal and freshwater ecosystems andto some extent marine ecosystems. Clearlydefined and agreed management objectives forthe different ecosystems would provide a betterbasis for making decisions in cases where a bal-ance needs to be found between different inter-ests and social objectives, and would help toachieve environmentally, socially and economi-cally sustainable development. For Svalbard,there is an ambitious target of maintaining the vir-tually untouched natural environment, but in thiscase too, there is a lack of clear managementobjectives for ecological status. It is therefore diffi-cult to judge whether current use is ecologicallysustainable, and one result may be that policyinstruments are not used effectively enough. Inaddition, land conversion and land-use change isstill, overall, the most important driver of biodiver-sity loss in Norway. Furthermore, the Norwegiannature management system has not yet beenadapted to take into account changes in ecosys-tems caused by climate change. In addition, thereare specific problems in the different ecosystems.

In this chapter, the Government proposes spe-cific action and tools to improve the sustainabilityof biodiversity management over time. More gen-eral measures are discussed first, followed bymore specific measures for each of the major eco-systems. The section on wetlands includes anaccount of how the Government intends torespond to a request from the Storting (Norwe-

gian parliament) concerning various issues relat-ing to the management of peatlands.

5.2 The Nature Diversity Act

The Nature Diversity Act is one of the most impor-tant instruments that was adopted as a result ofNorway’s first national strategy for the implemen-tation of the Convention on Biological Diversity(Report No. 42 to the Storting (2000–2001)). TheAct applies to Norwegian land territory, includingriver systems, and to Norwegian territorialwaters. Its provisions on access to genetic mate-rial also apply to Svalbard and Jan Mayen. Certainprovisions of the Act also apply on the continentalshelf and in the areas of jurisdiction establishedunder the Act relating to the economic zone ofNorway to the extent they are appropriate.According to the objects clause, the purpose ofthe Act is ‘to protect biological, geological andlandscape diversity and ecological processesthrough conservation and sustainable use, and insuch a way that the environment provides a basisfor human activity, culture, health and well-being,now and in the future, including a basis for Samiculture’.

Experience gained so far from application ofthe Nature Diversity Act has played a part in thedevelopment of the Government’s biodiversitypolicy. Since the Act has only been in force for afew years, information on its effects is still limited.This applies particularly to its effects on the eco-logical status of ecosystems, which can only beassessed over a longer time period. In addition,the Act is only one of a number of policy instru-ments, and the state of the environment in thelong term will depend on the combination of allpolicy instruments that are applied and the wholerange of pressures and impacts on ecosystems.

The provisions of the Nature Diversity Act thatare particularly relevant to this chapter are thegeneral provisions on sustainable use, includinggeneral principles of environmental law (‘princi-ples for official decision-making’, Chapter II), theprovisions on species management (Chapter III)and the provisions on alien organisms (ChapterIV).

The Ministry of Climate and Environmentcommissioned a report from the consultancy firmMulticonsult on experience of the application ofthe principles of environmental law set out in theAct and its provisions on priority species, selectedhabitat types and exemptions from protectiondecisions, which was published on 30 September


2014. Additional information was obtainedthrough talks with business organisations andothers after the report was published.

The provisions on species management in theNature Diversity Act were largely retained ortransferred from other legislation – the WildlifeAct, the Act relating to salmonids and freshwaterfish and the Nature Conservation Act. The provi-sions on alien organisms in the Nature DiversityAct, together with new Regulations relating toalien organisms, enter into force on 1 January2016. These new rules will be important in pre-venting the import and release of invasive alienorganisms. However, they will not provide a solu-tion to all the problems associated with invasivealien organisms that are already established in theNorwegian environment. Eradicating, containingand controlling invasive alien organisms requiresa great deal of time and resources, and completeeradication is not realistic. Priority measures arediscussed in the sections on each ecosystem inChapter 5.5. The Ministry of Climate and Environ-ment will in consultation with other relevant min-istries draw up an overall action plan describingpriorities for eradicating, containing and con-trolling invasive alien organisms.

The provision of the Nature Diversity Act onquality norms for biological, geological and land-scape diversity has only been used once, to estab-lish quality norms for wild salmon stocks. Thisprovision was not included when information onthe application of the Act was being collected.Quality norms can be useful tools if there is agree-ment that a species or habitat type requires spe-cial safeguards, for example because a populationis declining, but it is not clear what needs to bedone and several sectors are involved in manage-ment. In such cases, establishing a quality normcan encourage the development of a joint knowl-edge base and joint targets for the management ofthe species or habitat type.

Multiconsult’s report recommends some stepsto clarify the scope of the principles of environ-mental law and provide better guidance on howthey should be applied in practice. These arebeing followed up during the revision of the guide-lines on the application of the principles for officialdecision-making. In addition, the report makesrecommendations on the application of the provi-sions on priority species and selected habitattypes, and on improvements of the knowledgebase and steps to build up expertise at local andregional level.

5.3 Developing management objectives for good ecological status

As mentioned above, one problem for the Norwe-gian nature management authorities is the lack ofclear, agreed management objectives for ‘goodecological status’ in most ecosystems, with theexception of coastal and freshwater ecosystemsand to some extent marine ecosystems. Thisresults in differing views on the need for actionand where to strike a balance between differentinterests. The Nature Diversity Act will continueto be an important tool for a cross-sectoralapproach to sustainable nature management, par-ticularly through general management objectivesfor species and habitat types, principles for deci-sion-making, and instruments such as the desig-nation of selected habitat types. However, the Actdoes not provide guidance on specific manage-ment objectives for good ecological status to beused in the overall management of each ecosys-tem.

The Ministry of Climate and Environment willinitiate the development of scientifically based cri-teria for what is considered to be ‘good ecologicalstatus’. This will be carried out in close coopera-tion with relevant sectors, and will as far as possi-ble be based on existing criteria and indicators.Defining what is meant by ‘good ecological status’is the first step in developing management objec-tives for ecological status in different areas. It willnot necessarily be Norway’s objective to achievegood ecological status everywhere. If other publicinterests weigh more heavily, it may be decidedthat it is acceptable for parts of an ecosystem notto achieve good status. In addition, pressures thatare not under national control, such as climatechange, ocean acidification and long-range trans-port of pollutants, may make it impossible toachieve good ecological status everywhere. TheGovernment will develop management objectivesfor ecological status in the various ecosystems,and determine which types of areas or whichparts of each ecosystem should achieve good eco-logical status, taking all necessary factors intoconsideration. Specific management objectives forecological status are to be established by 2017.The work will include all the major ecosystemsexcept for the areas that come within the scope ofthe Water Management Regulations.

Once the management objectives for ecologi-cal status have been established, the Governmentwill organise the use of policy instruments with aview to maintaining ecological status in areas and


Figure 5.1

An illustration of what is meant by good and poor ecological status, using sugar kelp forest as an example.Illustration: Nyhetsgrafikk

High speciesdiversity

Shelter, important nursery area for fish

and crustaceans

High annualproduction of

plant material

Loss of shelter forcoastal cod, crustaceans

and other species

Species diversitygreatly reduced

food supplies for larger fish and

seabirds reduced

Largeloss of biomass, less CO

2 fixation

Ecological status

GOOD ECOLOGICAL STATUS POOR ECOLOGICAL STATUS

Ecological status is good if species and habitats show little change as a result of human activities, and environmental conditions andbiodiversity are maintained over time. For sugar kelp forests, this includes the presence of large kelpplants, small algae, microorganisms, crustaceans, molluscs and fish.

Ecological status is poor if human activity has led to radical changes from the original species and habitat types. For sugar kelp forests, this includes die-back of kelp plants, which are replaced by "turf algae", but only in summer. This results in loss of primary production and the loss of many other species and their habitats. There is less food for large fish and seabirds, and CO

2

fixation is lower.

Climate change and higher nutrient concentrations are two factors that can have a negative impact on sugar kelp forests. Climate change means higher temperatures on land and at sea, warmer and wetter winters, higher precipitation and more flooding. All this results in more runoff and higher levels of particulate matter and nutrients.

SUGAR KELP FOREST AS AN EXAMPLE


ecosystems where it is already good enough andimproving it in areas where ecological status ispoorer than stipulated by the management objec-tives. The Government will use this system as atool for making nature management more effec-tive and for setting priorities for restoration pro-jects in accordance with Aichi target 15. The Gov-ernment’s aim is for a management system basedon clearly defined objectives for ecological statusto be in place by 2020.

While this management system is being devel-oped, the Government will continue to apply sec-toral legislation, the Planning and Building Act,the Nature Diversity Act and the Svalbard Envi-ronmental Protection Act to reduce pressure onthe environment and safeguard areas that areimportant for biodiversity.


• Initiate work to clarify what is meant by ‘goodecological status’, based on scientific and verifia-ble criteria.

• By the end of 2017, establish management obje-ctives for the ecological status to be maintainedor achieved in Norwegian ecosystems.

• Seek to put in place a management system basedon clearly defined objectives for ecological statusby 2020.

5.4 Overall land-use management policy

Given that land conversion and land-use change isstill the most important driver of biodiversity lossin Norway today, the Government will seek toensure that environmental considerations areincorporated into and as appropriate given priorityin relevant decisions on land use. This applies todecisions taken by central government authoritiesand, equally importantly, to decisions taken aspart of the municipalities’ land-use managementresponsibilities under the Planning and BuildingAct. The municipalities are important partners inbiodiversity conservation, and their role is dis-cussed in more depth in Chapter 9.

The Government uses two principles as a basisfor land-use decisions that affect biodiversity.Firstly, the most valuable species, habitats andecosystems should be safeguarded in connectionwith decisions on land conversion and land-usechange. This requires good planning proceduresand a sound, up-to-date knowledge base. Sec-ondly, if a development or activity entails a risk of

loss of or damage to valuable biodiversity, the pre-ferred solution should generally be to locate itelsewhere. However, depending on the weightgiven to other important public interests, a differ-ent conclusion may be reached. These principlesfollow from the Nature Diversity Act together withsectoral legislation.

If, after weighing up all the advantages and dis-advantages in a particular case, it is concludedthat the negative consequences will have to beaccepted, the competent authority should con-sider whether to require mitigation measures inaccordance with the legal basis provided by therelevant legislation. In addition, restoration ofareas that are damaged by temporary develop-ments or activities should be required once thesehave ceased. If there are still significant residualimpacts, it may be appropriate to lay downrequirements for ecological compensation if therelevant legislation provides the legal basis forthis. Sections 11 and 12 of the Nature DiversityAct on the user-pays principle and on environmen-tally sound techniques and methods of operationmay have a bearing on the interpretation of thetypes of requirements that can be used. Ecologicalcompensation does not apply to the area where adevelopment is being carried out, but to restora-tion, establishment or protection of biodiversity inanother equivalent areas, preferably nearby andcontaining the same type of habitat. Compensa-tion measures may involve restoring degradedhabitat, creating new areas of habitat or protectingareas that would not otherwise have been pro-tected. Such measures are often complex in eco-

Figure 5.2 Ecological compensation

The figure shows the basic principles of the mitigation hierar-chy and ecological compensation. The cheapest and most effe-ctive way of reducing negative impacts is always to avoid da-mage, and the preferred sequence of steps is to avoid or mini-mise damage, followed by restoration, with compensation asthe last resort.

High

Low

PR

IOR

ITIS

E

Avoid potential negative impacts(e.g. by careful siting)

Minimise impacts that cannot becompletely avoided by reducingtheir duration, intensity or extentduring planning and construction.

Restore to reduce residualimpacts after the project iscompleted.

Conservation action in otherareas to compensate for loss ofecological or agriculturalfunctions or qualities.

Avoid

Minimise

Restore

Compensate


logical terms and also costly, and should normallyonly be considered as a last resort.

One of the main steps the Government is tak-ing to ensure that Norwegian land-use manage-ment takes biodiversity properly into account is toobtain better spatial data on species, ecosystemsand landscapes, see Chapter 8. Another approachis to strengthen municipal work on biodiversityand build up municipal expertise in this field, seeChapter 9. Furthermore, building up knowledgeabout the value of nature and ecosystem services,which is discussed in Chapter 4, will give a betterbasis for finding a balance between different inter-ests. The Government also proposes specific usesof sectoral legislation for various ecosystems inChapter 5.5 below.

Ecological coherence is of vital importance formaintaining biodiversity. Species need continuousor functionally connected areas of suitable habitatto allow mobility and the exchange of geneticmaterial and ensure long-term survival. Becauseindividual species’ needs vary so much, it is notpossible to establish general guidelines on whatprovides ecological coherence. However, it isclear that climate change will make ecologicalcoherence even more important. The habitat inspecies’ existing ranges will change as the climatechanges, and many species will have to adapt byshifting to new areas. Areas that are important forecological coherence may be found in any type ofecosystem. Types of areas that may be importantecological corridors include green spaces in

towns and built-up areas; lakes, river systems andriver mouths; and migration routes in the sea andon land. The term ‘green infrastructure’ includesall such areas.

Green infrastructure is not only essential forbiodiversity, but also valuable for people, forexample in connection with flood control and out-door recreation. Such multiple benefits are animportant reason why the EU has included theestablishment of green infrastructure as one ofthe targets of its biodiversity strategy.

Land-use planning under the Planning andBuilding Act is Norway’s most important tool forestablishing green infrastructure on land and outto one nautical mile from the baseline in coastalwaters. Existing protected areas can also functionas green infrastructure, and according to theNature Diversity Act, protected areas may beestablished to promote the conservation of ‘eco-logical and landscape coherence at national andinternational level’. The most suitable tools forpromoting ecological coherence will vary depend-ing on the species involved and how much it isnecessary to restrict the way an area is used toachieve the purpose in each case. The need toimprove ecological coherence, particularly in thecontext of climate change, and how this can beachieved, will be further reviewed.


• Continue to work towards a land-use manage-ment regime that takes biodiversity properly intoaccount by ensuring a sound knowledge base andstrengthening local and regional expertise onbiodiversity and the values associated with it.

• Further review the need to improve ecologicalcoherence and how to achieve this.

5.5 Management policy for each of Norway’s major ecosystems

5.5.1 Marine and coastal waters

Norway’s system of management plans for seaareas is a tool for integrated, ecosystem-basedmanagement, in other words a management sys-tem that promotes conservation and sustainableuse of ecosystems. Management plans have nowbeen drawn up for all three of Norway’s sea areas:the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, the NorwegianSea, and the North Sea and Skagerrak. The man-agement plans have been published in the form ofwhite papers submitted to the Storting.

Figure 5.3 Map showing the green structure and the limit of the built-up zone (red lines) in part of Trondheim. The corridor along the river Nidelven is shown in blue. The map was produced using the municipality’s digital mapping tool.


The purpose of the management plans is toprovide a framework for value creation throughthe sustainable use of natural resources and eco-system services in the sea areas and at the sametime maintain the structure, functioning, produc-tivity and diversity of the ecosystems. The man-agement plans are thus a tool both for facilitatingvalue creation and food security, and for maintain-ing the high environmental value of the sea areas.

The management plans clarify the overallframework and encourage closer coordinationand clear priorities for management of Norway’ssea areas. Activities in each area are regulated onthe basis of existing legislation governing differ-ent sectors. The Government will continue to usethe system of marine management plans.

The Government’s initiative to develop clearermanagement objectives for ‘good ecological sta-tus’ in ecosystems (discussed in Chapter 5.3) willmake it possible to target action and policy instru-ments to maintain and achieve good ecologicalstatus in marine ecosystems more precisely. Theriver basin management plans drawn up under theWater Management Regulations are the main

instruments for achieving and maintaining goodecological status in waters out to one nautical mileoutside the baseline. The Water ManagementRegulations are discussed further in Chapter5.5.2.

Ensuring that maritime space is used in a waythat takes proper account of biodiversity is just asimportant as land-use planning elsewhere. Inwaters out to one nautical mile outside the base-line, the main instrument for spatial planning isthe Planning and Building Act. The Governmentis updating its advice on municipal spatial plan-ning for areas in coastal waters. The aim is toensure as much consistency as possible from onemunicipality to another, and to give clear guide-lines for how biodiversity considerations shouldbe incorporated into the planning process. TheGovernment will also assess how marine spatialplanning and land-use planning in the coastal zonecan best be coordinated. This is important for spe-cies, habitats and ecosystems in the transitionalzone between sea and land and how they areaffected by local developments and pollution. Themarine management plans include spatial man-agement measures as tools for ecosystem-basedmanagement. The river basin management plansunder the Water Management Regulations mustinclude environmental objectives for water bodies.Approved management plans must be used as abasis for the activities of regional bodies and formunicipal and central government planning andactivities in the river basin district. Measures setout in the marine management plans and the riverbasin management plans are implemented in theusual way under the appropriate legislation andfollowing normal administrative procedures.

The most important elements of the Govern-ment’s policy for sustainable management ofmarine and coastal waters in specific sectors aredescribed below. Measures to protect threatenedspecies and habitats and to ensure protection of arepresentative selection of Norwegian nature aredescribed in Chapters 6 and 7.

Harvesting living marine resources

The Marine Resources Act provides a frameworkfor sustainable harvesting of living marineresources. It requires management based on theprecautionary approach in accordance with inter-national agreements and guidelines, and using anecosystem approach that takes into account bothhabitats and biodiversity. Management is alsobased on the best available scientific information.Harvesting methods and the way gear is used

Figure 5.4 Map of Norway’s marine management plan areas.

Source: Norwegian Environment Agency/Norwegian MappingAuthority


must take into account the need to reduce possi-ble adverse impacts on living marine resources.

Mapping of the seabed, for example throughthe MAREANO programme, has documented thatfisheries activities are having a considerableimpact on benthic ecosystems in certain areas,and trawling has the strongest impacts. Trawlshave been in use for more than a hundred years,and trawling has largely been concentrated in thesame areas. In recent years, there has been a sub-stantial reduction in trawl hours, partly becausemore fish have been available, and pressure onbenthic habitats has therefore been reduced. Thearea trawled has also been smaller than in previ-ous years. Technological developments areimproving efficiency and resulting in trawlinggear that has less environmental impact. The Gov-ernment will continue to promote the develop-ment and use of trawling gear that has as littleimpact as possible on the seabed, and of devicesin trawls that minimise unwanted bycatches.

The Regulations relating to sea-water fisheriescontain a general requirement to show special

care during fishing operations near known coralreefs. Many new coral reefs have been registeredin Norwegian waters through the MAREANO pro-gramme and other projects.

Some fish species, including sandeels, herringand capelin, are defined as key species in ecosys-tems, and have a large influence on other ele-ments of the biodiversity. They are important preyfor a variety of marine mammals, other fish andseabirds, and their stock size has a major influ-ence on populations of other species. Norway haschosen to introduce a new management model forthe sandeel fishery in the North Sea. The aim is tobuild up viable spawning stocks throughout thepart of the sandeel range that is within Norway’sExclusive Economic Zone.

The Government will continue to use a num-ber of measures to build up the Norwegian stockof European lobster. Strict regulation of lobstercatches will continue. There are still frequentbreaches of the rules on lobster harvesting, andcontrol and enforcement at sea will therefore con-tinue. The closure of certain areas to lobster trap-

Figure 5.5 The Norwegian stock of European lobster is no longer considered to be threatened. One of the conservation measures the authorities have introduced is the closure of certain areas to lobster trap-ping.

Photo: Rudolf Svensen


ping is a suitable conservation measure for a rela-tively stationary species like the lobster, and hasbeen shown to boost lobster numbers locally. TheGovernment will assess whether further action isneeded to prevent the American lobster frombecoming established in Norway in addition tothe prohibition on importing live American lob-sters.

Aquaculture

Aquaculture can have negative environmentalimpacts. In order to play a part in biodiversity con-servation, the aquaculture authorities will takeinto account all pressures and impacts associatedwith aquaculture activities, and not only directimpacts at each aquaculture site.

The aquaculture legislation includes a numberof important tools designed to safeguard the envi-ronment, including requirements for monitoringthe ecological status of the seabed below and nearaquaculture facilities, criteria for authorising theuse of areas for aquaculture and rules on the max-imum permitted biomass of fish at each locality.There are also general operating rules, includingrequirements for fallowing for disease control,technical requirements to prevent fish escapesand rules on combating salmon lice and theremoval of escaped farmed fish from rivers. Therules are constantly being further developed, andregulations were recently adopted making theindustry responsible for funding measures toreduce the proportion of escaped farmed fish inrivers. The Government is also taking steps tostrengthen the knowledge base in these areas.

The Government considers environmentalsustainability to be the most important criterionfor regulating further growth of the aquacultureindustry, and will continue its work in line with theStorting’s decisions during its consideration of thewhite paper on predictable and environmentallysustainable growth of Norwegian salmon andtrout farming (Meld. St. 16 (2014–2015)).

Petroleum activities

Environmental considerations are an integral partof Norwegian petroleum activities.

To protect marine ecosystems from pressuresand impacts associated with the oil and gas indus-try, impact assessments under the PetroleumActivities Act are required both before new areasare opened for petroleum activity, and before spe-cific field development projects. Impact assess-ments are also required before pipeline- and

cable-laying, when fields cease production, and inconnection with the disposal of installations. Fur-ther conditions apply in certain areas, for examplerestrictions on when drilling and seismic surveysare permitted in order to protect biodiversity andsafeguard the interests of other industries.

An operator must obtain a permit under thePollution Control Act before starting petroleumactivities. Permits include conditions relating toreleases to air and sea and preparedness andresponse to acute pollution, which depend on thevulnerability of the area in question and the availa-ble technology. For example, special require-ments may be included to avoid adverse impactson corals and other vulnerable benthic fauna, sea-bird populations, and fish stocks during thespawning season.

This system ensures that environmental con-siderations are integrated into all phases of petro-leum activities from exploration to field develop-ment, operations and field closure, and helps tomaintain good ecological status in Norwegian seaareas.

Shipping, ports and fairways

A high level of maritime safety and a satisfactorypreparedness and response system for acute pol-lution are essential for preventing damage to bio-diversity. The Norwegian Coastal Administrationcontinually seeks to optimise maritime safety, pre-paredness and response measures. These mustbe designed on the basis of information about theprobability of accidents and their possible conse-quences for life, health and the environment. In2016, the Government plans to submit a whitepaper containing an overall review of maritimesafety and the preparedness and response systemfor acute pollution.

Norway’s National Transport Plan 2014–2023states that the principles set out in the NatureDiversity Act must be followed when planning,constructing and operating transport infrastruc-ture. Large-scale developments often require anenvironmental impact assessment, which mustinclude a description of potential impacts on biodi-versity.

Shipping in polar waters, as in other parts ofthe world, is subject to the rules of internationalconventions adopted by the International Mari-time Organization (IMO). The Polar Code, whichwas adopted by IMO in 2014, is a mandatory inter-national code of safety for ships operating in polarwaters. The Code consists of two parts, one onsafety and one on environment-related matters. It


sets specific requirements for ships operating inpolar waters, for example on ship design, equip-ment, operations, environmental protection, navi-gation and crew qualifications. The most impor-tant environment-related provisions deal with pol-lution by oil, chemicals, sewage and garbagereleased from ships. The Polar Code enters intoforce on 1 January 2017.

Norway’s Act relating to ports and navigablewaters is intended to facilitate safe and unimpededpassage and sound use and management of navi-gable waters in accordance with the public inter-est. The public interest includes biodiversity con-siderations. These must be taken into accountwhen considering applications for permits forworks under the Act. ‘Works’ in this connectioninclude quays, bridges, aquaculture facilities,cables, pipelines, dredging and dumping. The Actalso includes provisions on the use of navigablewaters, aids to navigation and port activities.

Invasive alien organisms

There is a high risk of the introduction of alienorganisms when ships discharge untreated ballast

water, and these may displace native organisms.Climate change means that the risk that suchorganisms will become established is rising. Nor-way regulates ballast water management throughits national Ballast Water Regulations, whichentered into force in 2009. The regulations will berevised once the Ballast Water Convention hasentered into force, which is expected to happen inthe near future.

The Government will give priority to efforts tocontain and control the Pacific oyster in accord-ance with the forthcoming action plan for the spe-cies. The Government will continue the currentmanagement approach for red king crab, which isto regulate the commercial fishery in the easternpart of its distribution area in Norway and encour-age harvesting of all sizes of crabs to control thespecies further west.

Plastic waste

Sound waste management is essential for prevent-ing marine litter. Dumping of waste is forbidden,and there are requirements to search for andreport lost fishing gear. The Government has rein-

Figure 5.6 The Pacific oyster is an alien species in Norway, and there is a high risk that it will have nega-tive impacts on Norwegian coastal ecosystems. The Government will give priority to efforts to contain and control the species.

Photo: Kim Abel/Naturarkivet


forced efforts at both national and internationallevel to prevent littering of coastal and marineareas, and to build up knowledge about thesources of litter, its impacts and possible actionagainst marine litter and microplastics. More sup-port has been made available for voluntary beachclean-up campaigns. A producer responsibilityscheme for leisure craft is being considered, andin 2016 the Norwegian Environment Agency is topresent a review of other effective national actionto deal with marine litter. The Agency will alsopublish an assessment of possible measures toreduce and prevent microplastic pollution of themarine environment. A cooperation project hasbeen started in which fishermen can enter into avoluntary agreement with the EnvironmentAgency allowing them to deliver waste theyretrieve during fishing operations free of chargein port. The waste is then registered and as muchas possible of it is recycled. The scheme currentlyapplies to four Norwegian ports, and the data col-lected will be used in identifying solutions to theproblem of marine litter. The Directorate of Fish-eries will continue to run its annual retrieval pro-gramme for lost fishing gear. The authorities alsointend to complete the work of removing aban-doned mussel cultivation facilities. Norway willcontinue to play an active part in internationalefforts, mainly organised by the UN EnvironmentAssembly (UNEA), the UN Environment Pro-gramme (UNEP), the UN Food and AgricultureOrganization (FAO), the Convention for the Pro-tection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (the OSPAR Convention) and theNorth East Atlantic Fisheries Commission(NEAFC), to reduce the quantities of plastic wasteand microplastics in the marine environment,build up knowledge about microplastics and pre-vent losses and ensure retrieval of fishing gear.

The mineral industry

In recent years, the mineral industry has showngrowing interest in potential mineral deposits onthe Norwegian continental shelf. The knowledgebase is inadequate at present, and mapping andsurveys are therefore the key activities. It will besome time before any commercial extraction ofminerals can be started, and this would requiremore knowledge about the resource base, extrac-tion methods, coexistence with other industries,and benthic species and habitats. Unless precau-tions are taken, activities on the seabed can dam-age rare and vulnerable species and habitats. Thepermanent footprint of mineral extraction should

be minimised. Before any mineral activities can bepermitted on the continental shelf, the knowledgebase, including knowledge of environmentalimpacts, must be improved and sound legislationmust be in place.

Offshore energy

The Offshore Energy Act entered into force on 1July 2010. Under the Act, offshore renewableenergy production may only be established afterthe public authorities have opened specific geo-graphical areas for licence applications. Before anarea can be opened for offshore wind power devel-opment, the Act also requires the central govern-ment authorities to carry out a strategic environ-mental assessment (SEA). One important purposeof drawing up the Offshore Energy Act was toensure that a framework was in place well beforeany developments started and to maintain controlof spatial planning offshore.

As part of the implementation of the Act, aworking group led by the Norwegian WaterResources and Energy Directorate identifiedareas it considered to be suitable for wind power.The Directorate then conducted an SEA for theseareas, which was submitted to the Ministry ofPetroleum and Energy in 2013. The SEA was com-prehensive, and included an evaluation of environ-mental, economic and business interests associ-ated with the areas and their suitability in techno-logical and economic terms. The Directorate con-cluded that five areas should be given priority forwind power developments. None of these has asyet been opened. Under the Offshore Energy Act,environmental impact assessments must be con-ducted in connection with licence applications,and detailed plans for each project must be drawnup.

5.5.2 Rivers and lakes

Integrated management

Cross-sectoral cooperation on water managementunder the Water Management Regulations (whichincorporate the Water Framework Directive intoNorwegian law) is an important tool for achievinggood ecological status in Norway’s rivers andlakes. The management plans for river basin dis-tricts include environmental objectives for waterbodies and programmes of measures.

The measures included in the river basin man-agement plans drawn up for the period 2016–2021are to be operational in 2018 at the latest, so that it


is possible to achieve the national target of goodecological status by 2021. This has involved coop-eration between sectors to put together sets ofmeasures to reduce negative impacts and achieveenvironmental objectives. Further work will becarried out on the impacts of salmon lice andescaped farmed fish on wild salmon stocks. TheGovernment will ensure the coordination ofefforts by all relevant sectors to put the pro-grammes of measures set out in the river basinmanagement plans into operation so that the envi-ronmental objectives can be met. Decisions on theimplementation of specific measures will be takenby the competent authority in each case under therelevant legislation.

Planning for river systems and adjacent areas

According to section 1–8 of the Planning andBuilding Act, the natural and cultural environ-ment, outdoor recreation, landscape and otherpublic interests in the 100-metre belt along theshoreline and along rivers and lakes must begiven special consideration in planning processes.The same section also requires municipalities toconsider whether developments that will have anegative impact on the environment should bespecifically prohibited in this belt. Most munici-palities have now introduced a prohibition againstbuilding along rivers and lakes. The Governmentconsiders it vital that municipalities and countyauthorities are aware of the importance of differ-ent ecosystems in climate change adaptation. Forexample, riparian ecosystems and floodplains canmoderate the impacts of flooding, and should beretained as far as possible in planning processes.Section 11 of the Water Resources Act gives themunicipalities the authority to determine the mini-mum breadth of the natural vegetation belt to bemaintained along river systems to counteract run-off and provide a habitat for plants and animals.The Ministry of Climate and Environment, in con-sultation with the Ministry of Petroleum andEnergy and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food,will ensure that the municipalities receive adviceon how to apply this provision.

Works in river systems

River systems are an essential and characteristicelement of Norwegian nature, and also an impor-tant source of renewable energy. The legislationon river systems makes licences mandatory for allworks in river systems that may significantlyaffect public interests. The competent authority

may lay down necessary conditions for suchworks. Hydropower developments have broughtabout the greatest physical disturbance of Nor-way’s river systems, but are also the backbone ofthe Norwegian electricity system and of vitalimportance to people’s welfare.

As a general rule, a licence is required to con-struct and operate a new hydropower installation.However, small-scale installations are generallyexempt from the licensing requirement and aredealt with under the Planning and Building Act.Licences contain conditions relating to naturemanagement and mitigation measures. The flowdynamics and variation in water flow are generallykey to the value of a river system as a landscapeelement and for outdoor recreation and biodiver-sity. Licences therefore frequently include arequirement to maintain a minimum water dis-charge, or environmental flow, in order to main-tain more of the connectivity and flow dynamics ofthe river channel.

During licensing processes, the waterresources authorities will attach special impor-tance to adjusting flow regimes to maintain theecology of river systems in the best possible way.This applies both during licensing of new hydro-power installations and procedures to alter theconditions for operation of existing installations.The use of measures to improve ecological statusthat will limit power production must be consid-ered on the basis of an overall cost-benefit assess-ment of the effects on public and private interests.

The competent authorities include standardconditions, including conditions relating to naturemanagement, in all new licences for hydropowerinstallations. The conditions relating to naturemanagement have been developed through expe-rience of river system management, and make itpossible to require licensees to investigate theimpacts of hydropower production on the ecologyof river systems, and to take certain steps toreduce the adverse impacts of developments, forexample replenishing spawning gravel or remov-ing barriers to fish migration.

Requiring licensees to investigate the long-term environmental impacts of hydropower devel-opments makes it possible to identify whether fur-ther mitigation measures are needed. The authori-ties can also use the accumulated knowledge andexperience of the impacts of earlier hydropowerdevelopments in determining the conditions thatshould be included in new licences. Furthermore,this knowledge and experience will provide a bet-ter basis for assessing the cumulative environ-mental effects if new developments are permitted.


The Government intends to make more activeuse of the standard nature management condi-tions to improve ecological status in river systemswhere there are hydropower developments.

The Norwegian river basin management planspoint out that many of the current licences forhydropower developments lack the standardnature management conditions.

It is true that about half of all current hydro-power licences lack the standard nature manage-ment conditions, which have only been includedin all new licences since 1992. However, there islegal provision for requiring improvements of eco-logical status, even though the older licences donot include the modern nature management con-ditions. The water resources legislation providesfor the licensing authority to revise the conditionsfor licences after a certain number of years, pro-vided that certain requirements are met. This pro-vides a tool for modernising the conditions inlicences to bring them more closely into line withcurrent environmental standards. It is possible toincorporate the standard nature management con-ditions when licences are revised, and subse-quently to require the licensee to take action toimprove ecological status or to carry out investi-gations to allow an evaluation of which measuresare needed. The problem is that a revision pro-cess can be very time-consuming and resource-intensive, and that measures to improve ecologi-cal status are needed in many areas affected byolder hydropower developments. The scale of theadministrative resources required means that itmay take a long time to achieve the environmentalobjectives for rivers where there are older hydro-power developments.

The Government will review more efficientways of making the standard nature managementconditions or other effective instruments applica-ble, in the first instance to river systems regulatedby hydropower licences where there are known tobe environmental problems. This will be donewith a view to requiring action to achieve thenationally approved environmental objectives inthe river basin management plans for the period2016–2022.

Within certain limits, the energy authoritiescan through a revision process require measuresto improve ecological status that will affect powerproduction, for example requirements to maintaina minimum water discharge. This cannot be doneusing the standard nature management condi-tions. The Norwegian Water Resources andEnergy Directorate and the Norwegian Environ-ment Agency have carried out a joint screening

study of all river systems where revision of hydro-power licences can be started by 2022, coveringabout 395 licences in 187 river systems. Thereport assesses the environmental qualities thatcan be maintained through cost-effective meas-ures that will involve some reduction in electricityproduction. The two agencies recommend givinghigh priority to 50 river systems where they iden-tified a high potential for significant improve-ments in ecological status with only a small ormoderate estimated loss in power production. Onthe basis of an overall national cost-benefit analy-sis, the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy and theMinistry of Climate and Environment haveinstructed the river basin district authorities thatas a general rule, requirements relating to mini-mum flow and/or water levels in regulation reser-voirs are only to be used as a basis for achievingenvironmental objectives in the 50 high-priorityriver systems.

A good many hydropower licences will berevised during the first management cycle forNorway’s river basin districts. During this period,it may also be appropriate to require measures toimprove ecological status in river systems otherthan the 50 high-priority river systems. This canbe done by applying the standard nature manage-ment conditions, requiring licensing of olderhydropower developments (some of these havenever had licences, see the next paragraph), oramending individual conditions in certain hydro-power licences. The Government expects sparinguse to be made of proposals to require licensing ofpreviously unlicensed developments or to amendconditions in licences in a way that would reduceelectricity production. If the competent authoritiesfor the river basin districts nevertheless considerthat water flow requirements should be given pri-ority in some of these river systems, they mustprovide grounds for their conclusions in the man-agement plans. A new cost-benefit analysis mustbe made during the second management cycle(2022–2027).

There are still some older hydropower devel-opments for which no licences have ever beenissued. In special cases, the authorities have thelegal power to require licensing of such develop-ments. The authorities will assess on a case-by-case basis whether to use such processes as anopportunity to improve the ecological status ofriver systems if there are strong environmentalgrounds for doing so. In such cases, the standardnature management conditions will be includedduring the licensing process. A better overview isneeded of unlicensed hydropower developments,


including hydropower plants, and where they arelocated. The Ministry of Petroleum and Energyand the Ministry of Climate and Environment willtogether survey unlicensed developments anddraw up an overview.

There may also be other grounds thanimprovement of ecological status for operationaladjustments or altering conditions in licences, forexample relating to landscape considerations oroutdoor recreation interests. Revision of licencesand other tools provided by the water resourceslegislation can also be used to achieve improve-ments for these interests. River systems that areprotected against hydropower developments arediscussed in Chapter 7.3.

Management of wild salmonids

Norway bases its management of wild salmonstocks on international management principlesadopted by the North Atlantic Salmon Conserva-tion Organization (NASCO) and on a policy docu-ment on the protection of wild Atlantic salmon(Proposition No. 32 (2006–2007) to the Storting).Norway’s objective is to maintain and rebuildsalmon stocks of a size and composition that safe-guards the genetic diversity of the species andmakes full use of the productive capacity ofsalmon habitat.

The system of national salmon rivers andfjords gives about three-quarters of Norway’soverall salmon resources special protection inselected river systems and fjords. This system isto be evaluated in 2017. If it is not considered to beproviding adequate protection for wild salmon, theGovernment will assess the need to providestronger protection against the effects of humanactivity.

The quality norms for wild salmon lay downguidelines for management objectives for salmonstocks. They clarify what is meant by ‘good status’for a wild salmon stock. The Ministry of Climateand Environment will ensure that the classifica-tion of the most important salmon stocks inaccordance with the norms is continued. If somestocks do not meet the criteria for good status inaccordance with the norms, and there are noexemptions from the requirements in or underthe norms, the Ministry will, in consultation withthe relevant authorities, seek to clarify why goodstatus has not been achieved and draw up a planfor how the norms can be achieved.

The Government will continue efforts to eradi-cate the salmon parasite Gyrodactylus salaris fromriver systems in accordance with scientific advice,

mainly by treating rivers with rotenone. As of 1July 2015, the parasite had been eradicated from atotal of 22 infected river systems. Treatment of afurther 17 river systems had been completed, andit is hoped that they can be declared free of theparasite within the next five years.

Although for many salmon stocks, fishing isnot the main threat, regulating fishing in riversand the sea helps to reduce the overall pressureon wild salmon and thus ensure the survival ofcertain stocks New regulatory measures for fish-ing for anadromous salmonids will be introducedin 2016. These will focus on sustainability andvalue creation. The Government is also seeking toensure that fishing in the Tana river system is sus-tainable from 2017 onwards. Cooperation withRussia on the management of wild salmon in theFinnmark and Murmansk region will be followedup in accordance with a memorandum of under-standing between Norway and Russia.

The Government will continue to make use ofgene banks to safeguard the genetic diversity ofsalmon and sea trout stocks and to safeguardstocks that are threatened by Gyrodactylus salaris.However, the Government’s long-term aim is to beable to restock the rivers from which these stocksoriginate, and for the stocks to be able to survivein the wild.

The Government will continue the liming pro-gramme for rivers and lakes to counteract theeffects of acid rain. Liming improves conditionsnot only for wild salmon, but also for biodiversityin general. There are now 21 salmon rivers in theliming programme, and after many years, a largenumber of salmon stocks have recovered. Of thewild salmon caught in Norway, 10–15 % are nowfrom rivers that are in the liming programme.

Action to reduce the negative impacts ofsalmon lice and escaped farmed fish is discussedin the section on aquaculture in Chapter 5.5.1.

Regulation of pollution

Section 8 of the Pollution Control Act states thatordinary pollution from agriculture is permittedunless otherwise specified in regulations issuedunder section 9 of the Act. Regulations on the stor-age and use of fertiliser products of organic originhave been adopted to prevent pollution and to pro-mote sustainable soil management and ensurethat biodiversity concerns are taken into accountwhen they are used. The Government is revisingthese regulations, and one of the aims is to reducepressure on water bodies in agricultural areas.


Some pharmaceuticals that pose a significantrisk to the environment have been included on aWatch List under the Water Framework Directive.All the EU member states are required to monitorthe concentrations of these substances in waterbodies. In addition, the environmental effects ofpharmaceuticals are considered when makingdecisions on whether to grant marketing authori-sation for their use in veterinary medicines. Wastewater treatment plants are not designed to removepharmaceuticals. Because of the environmentaldamage that pharmaceuticals can cause, it isimportant to inform the public about how to dis-pose of unused medicines. The Ministry of Healthand Care Services has therefore asked the Nor-wegian Medicines Agency, together with the phar-macies and the pharmaceutical industry, to informthe public about the pharmacies’ take-backscheme for unused medicines.

Alien organisms

The new Regulations relating to alien organisms(in force from 1 January 2016) introduce arequirement to hold a permit for the import orrelease of a long list of aquatic plants and otherorganisms. Steps to deal with alien fish specieswill be based on these regulations and on a forth-coming action plan for combating alien exotic fishspecies. Action to contain and control Canadianpondweed and Nuttall’s pondweed will also beorganised within the framework of the action planfor the two species.

5.5.3 Wetlands

Introduction

One element of the Government’s policy for sus-tainable use and good ecological status in wet-lands is its follow-up of a request from the Stortingdated 2 June 2015. The Storting decided to sendthis request in connection with a debate on pro-posals for integrated long-term management ofpeatlands in Norway. The Government was askedto assess relevant issues relating to the manage-ment of peatlands in its white paper on Norway’sbiodiversity action plan and in white papers onagriculture and on the forestry and wood indus-try.

Threatened species and habitat types associ-ated with wetlands, and action to protect them, arediscussed in Chapter 6.4.3, and measures toensure conservation of a representative selectionof wetlands are discussed in Chapter 7.3.3.

Many wetlands are still under considerablepressure, although the situation has improved insome respects in recent years. Because of theimportance of wetlands for biodiversity and car-bon storage and their potential importance inflood control and drought mitigation, the Govern-ment will intensify efforts to improve the ecologi-cal status of priority areas so that remaining wet-lands are safeguarded.

Internationally, the importance of wetlandshas been recognised for many years, and theRamsar Convention provides a global frameworkfor the conservation and wise use of wetlands.The 168 countries that are parties to the conven-tion have drawn up a fourth strategic plan for theperiod 2016–2024 that each country is expectedto implement. Norway is doing so as part of theaction plan in the present white paper. The conser-vation and sustainable use of peatlands was one ofthe topics discussed at the 12th Conference of theParties to the Ramsar Convention in June 2015. Aresolution adopted at the conference encouragesall countries to limit ‘activities that lead to drain-age of peatlands and may cause subsidence, flood-ing and the emission of greenhouse gases.’ TheNordic countries played an active part in the adop-tion of this resolution, and the Nordic environ-ment ministers have agreed to join forces tostrengthen efforts for the conservation and resto-ration of peatlands.

The Government will ensure that the valuesand benefits associated with wetlands, includingpeatlands, are given greater weight in the applica-tion of sectoral legislation and the Planning andBuilding Act. This will include providing betterguidance on the importance of incorporating thevalues and benefits associated with wetlands,including peatlands, into municipal land-use plan-ning, and how this can be done. The Governmentwill also encourage municipalities to use naturalflood control, including maintenance and restora-tion of riverbank, wetland and ecotone vegetation,as an integral part of their climate change adapta-tion work. The official Government expectationsfor regional and municipal planning make it clearthat municipalities and county authorities need tobe aware of the importance of different ecosys-tems for climate change adaptation. This alsoapplies to the county governors, whose responsi-bilities include providing guidance for the munici-palities in climate change adaptation. Ecosystemssuch as wetlands, river banks and forest can mod-erate the impacts of climate change, and their con-servation should therefore be included in land-useplanning processes. The Government expects


municipalities and county authorities to take par-ticular note of natural hazards and future climatechange, and to identify important values associ-ated with biodiversity and maintain them throughregional and municipal planning. It is important tokeep track of developments, and the Governmentwill therefore ensure that the municipalitiesreport on permits for land-use change in wetlandareas in the same way as for cultivation of newareas. If important public interests make it neces-sary to allow developments on peatland, exca-vated material should as far as is practicable beused in the restoration of other peatlands.

Use of peat

Norwegian potting soil may contain a high propor-tion of peat extracted from peatland, oftenimported from other European countries. Peatextraction damages plant and animal habitats andresults in greenhouse gas emissions. Industrialpeat extraction is one of the major pressures thatis causing degradation of peatlands internation-ally. It is therefore important to make consumersaware that it is possible to use soil that does notcontain peat for gardens. The Government willconsider requiring producers to provide clearlabelling of the contents of soil products. Theneed for soil improvers and growth media could inprinciple be met by using other renewableresources. However, phasing out peat may resultin more use of replacements, for exampleimported coir (coconut fibre). It is important toensure that switching to other products will resultin a real environmental improvement. The Gov-ernment will therefore review the consequencesof phasing out the use of peat more thoroughly.

In June 2015, the Storting debated proposalsfor integrated long-term management of peatlandsin Norway, and decided to request the Govern-ment to amend Norway’s regulations on environ-mental impact assessment (EIA) as soon as possi-ble to make an EIA mandatory for peat extractionprojects below the current limits, i.e. total volumeextracted less than 2 million m3 or site surfacearea less than 150 hectares. This issue will be fur-ther reviewed during the revision of the Norwe-gian regulations to bring them into line with therevised EU Directive 2014/52. The deadline forimplementing the directive is spring 2017.

Sustainable forestry to safeguard wetlands

The construction of new drainage ditches in con-nection with forestry operations is forbidden, but

already existing ditches may be cleared. In certainareas, it may be necessary to maintain old ditchesso that timber production does not decline. How-ever, clearing old, more or less blocked ditches inareas where no productive forest has been estab-lished can dry out active peatland and swamp for-ests. The Government intends to revise the regu-lations on sustainable forestry to prohibit both theconstruction of new drainage ditches and clearingof old ditches in areas where no productive foresthas been established. This will be further dis-cussed in a forthcoming white paper on forestryfrom the Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

Regulations on new cultivation of land

The updated cross-party agreement on climatepolicy from 2012 includes a decision to revise theregulations on new cultivation of land to reflect cli-mate change considerations. The Government isconsidering how to do this, and will among otherthings commission a review of the impacts of vari-ous measures relating to new cultivation of peat-land, focusing on their mitigation effect and cost.The option of prohibiting new cultivation in peat-land areas will also be considered. The Govern-ment will hold a public consultation process onthe proposed amendments to the regulations afterthe review has been published.

Restoration of wetlands

Peatland restoration improves ecological status,and will also improve and increase the areas ofsuitable habitat for many threatened species. Peat-land restoration, together with improvements ofecological status as required by the river basinmanagement plans, is the Government’s mostimportant approach to implementing the interna-tional target of restoring at least 15 % of degradedecosystems.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change (IPCC), peatland restoration isone of the most cost-effective ways of reducinggreenhouse gas emissions from the agriculturalsector globally. A 2010 report on measures andinstruments for achieving Norway’s climate tar-gets by 2020 (Climate Cure 2020) also found thisto be a cost-effective measure, with an estimatedprice of NOK 168 per tonne CO2. Restoration ofpeatlands and other wetlands can also be a usefulclimate change adaptation measure. Intact wet-lands, particularly those that are fed by rivers, canprovide protection against destructive flooding. Inaddition, they can reduce the impacts of drought.


Restored peatlands can start to build up a peatlayer again and thus store more carbon. However,this is a very slow process. When peatlands arefirst rewetted, methane emissions will increase.However, in the long term a net increase in carbonstorage is expected.

In 2015, the Ministry of Climate and Environ-ment started a three-year pilot project on peatlandrestoration. The aims for the sites that areincluded are to stop greenhouse gas emissions,enhance their role in climate change adaptationand improve ecological status. Most of the locali-ties included in the pilot project are within pro-tected areas. At the same time, a project for riversystem and wetland/peatland restoration wasestablished by a committee of directorates underthe Water Management Regulations to ensure thenecessary cooperation and coordination of initia-tives in these areas. It is intended to facilitate theimplementation of Norwegian restoration initia-tives, encourage the exchange of information andexperience, and assess possible mechanisms forcloser coordination of planning and funding ofprojects where authorities from several sectorsare involved.

As part of its efforts to strengthen the nationalcross-party agreement on climate policy, the Gov-ernment will draw up a plan for expanding restora-tion initiatives for peatlands and other wetlands asa climate policy measure in the period 2016–2020.Restoration will be organised so that projects playa part in achieving the Government’s goals for cli-mate change mitigation and adaptation and forimprovements in ecological status. The Norwe-gian Environment Agency and the NorwegianAgricultural Agency are responsible for drawingup the plan, which is to be completed in thecourse of 2016.

5.5.4 Forest

Forest management in Norway is strongly influ-enced by the forestry legislation and the way it isapplied in practice.

Strengthening environmental concerns in forestry

As announced in the 2011 white paper on agricul-tural, forestry and food policy, the Governmentwill give greater weight to environmental con-cerns in forestry by making use of the instru-ments introduced in the Nature Diversity Act andpolicy instruments for the forestry sector, includ-ing environmental inventories, knowledge devel-opment and application of the Norwegian PEFC

standard, so that more biomass can be harvestedfrom Norwegian forests while at the same timemaintaining biodiversity. This will be discussedfurther in the forthcoming white paper on for-estry policy from the Ministry of Agriculture andFood.

Regulations on sustainable forestry

Regulations on sustainable forestry under the For-estry Act are Norway’s key legislation for manag-ing forest areas that do not have statutory protec-tion. The Government considers that any intensifi-cation of forestry involving an increase in timberharvesting should be combined with strongerenvironmental measures in forestry. The Govern-ment will discuss this further in a forthcomingwhite paper on forestry policy.

Grant scheme for forestry management plans and environmental inventories

For many years, the Ministry of Agriculture andFood has provided grants for forest owners whodraw up forestry management plans for theirproperties. Landowners generally engage privatecompanies to obtain the necessary informationand draw up the plans, and often many forest own-ers in the same area will commission forestrymanagement plans at the same time, so that datacollection takes place over a larger area.

Since 1990, it has been a condition for award-ing grants that forestry management plans alsoinclude information on important environmentalfeatures of the forest property. Since 2000, therehas been a requirement to record important habi-tats for red-listed species according to a specifiedmethod (known as environmental inventories inforest) on the basis of research on red-listed spe-cies and their habitat requirements. Environmen-tal information acquired in this way provides abasis for environmental measures carried outdone by the owners, and in addition the informa-tion from environmental inventories often pro-vides a basis for voluntary protection of forest.

By 2015, about 70 000 areas covering a totalarea of about 750 square kilometres had beenidentified through environmental inventories andset aside as key biotopes that are not to be felled.This corresponds to almost 1 % of the total area ofproductive forest. Since environmental invento-ries have not yet been carried out for all forestproperties, the proportion of productive forest setaside as key biotopes is expected to increase.


Regulations relating to the planning and approval of forestry and farm roads

Norway adopted new regulations on the planningand approval of forestry and farm roads in May2015. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food willissue a circular on the regulations describing howto proceed if applications are received for the con-struction of forestry roads where subsequent log-ging may damage forest areas of high conserva-tion value. The intention is to ensure that the envi-ronmental authorities, in consultation with the for-estry authorities, investigate whether protectionon a voluntary basis is a possibility in such cases.If the forest owner is interested in protection on avoluntary basis, the necessary procedures will bestarted. If not, the application for road construc-tion will be processed in the normal way inaccordance with the regulations.

Management of forest cervids

Moose, roe deer and red deer are the cervids thatare mainly associated with forests in Norway. Thefallow deer is an alien species, and is found in Øst-fold county. The Nature Diversity Act and theWildlife Act and regulations under these acts pro-vide the general framework for cervid manage-ment in Norway. The specific regulations on themanagement of cervids are of key importance.They require the municipalities to determineobjectives for stocks of moose, red deer and roedeer in areas where hunting is permitted. TheGovernment considers it important to organisecervid management locally.

Cervid populations in Norway have grownstrongly after the Second World War. Moosestocks have for a time been too large for the avail-able grazing resources in parts of the southernhalf of Norway. Grazing damage as a result ofrecord-high cervid densities is costly for the for-estry industry. Large populations of cervids alsohave a negative effect on traffic safety because therisk of deer-vehicle collisions rises. The Ministryof Climate and Environment will encourage stepsto make information on cervids available to usergroups and promote knowledge-based manage-ment of cervid populations to minimise negativedensity-related effects such as grazing damageand deer-vehicle collisions.

Invasive alien organisms

Foreign tree species can have negative impacts onnative biodiversity. Planting and sowing of such

species is regulated by the Regulations relating tothe release of foreign tree species for forestry pur-poses under the Nature Diversity Act. The Minis-try of Climate and Environment will continue toadminister the regulations, and will in consulta-tion with the Ministry of Agriculture and Foodrevise the guidelines on the regulations and pub-lish a new edition. Another aim is to simplifyadministrative procedures for planting foreigntree species that are to be used as Christmastrees. In such cases, it may be appropriate torequire notification rather than an application for apermit. In this context, there will be a focus oncontrol of the spread of foreign tree species.

The spread of foreign tree species from siteswhere they have been planted earlier can also be aproblem, particularly in protected areas. Theadministrative authorities for these areas will playan important role in containing and controllingthe undesirable spread of foreign tree species, seeChapter 7.2 on management of protected areas.The Government will discuss appropriate meas-ures to be used outside protected areas in theforthcoming white paper on forestry policy.

5.5.5 Cultural landscapes

The Government’s position is that it is neither pos-sible nor desirable to revert to the agriculturaltechniques that were common fifty years ago.Nevertheless, action to maintain the ecologicalstatus of areas of cultural landscape is important.

The environmental programmes and grantschemes in the agricultural sector are intended toreduce pressures and impacts associated withagriculture and to maintain the cultural landscape.A number of them also result in improvements inagricultural practices and boost production. Mostof the environmental grant schemes in the agricul-tural sector are part of the Agricultural Agree-ment between the state and the farmers, and areorganised in environmental programmes atnational, regional and municipal level. Thenational environmental programme provides acentral framework and national goals and includeskey grant schemes for the whole country. Theregional environmental programmes includegrant schemes at county level, adapted to the envi-ronmental situation in different parts of the coun-try, and the scheme for specific environmentalmeasures in agriculture is organised at municipallevel. A considerable proportion of the fundingprovided through these schemes is allocated tocultural landscape projects. Funding for projects


in a set of selected agricultural landscapes and forcultural landscapes that are World Heritage Sitesis being used to maintain farming activities andimprove coordination of the management andmaintenance of some particularly valuable areas.The Government will continue to use both agricul-tural and environmental policy instruments thatencourage use and active management of the agri-cultural landscape. This helps to counteract thenegative trends that are affecting cultural land-scapes – overgrowing of open areas with trees andscrub, and abandonment of previously farmedareas. Support for cultural landscape projectsunder the environmental programmes, selectedcultural landscapes and the World Heritage siteswill be continued as appropriate.

The Ministry of Transport and Communica-tions will continue its efforts relating to alienorganisms by integrating this work into relevantconstruction, operation and maintenance projectsfor transport infrastructure. The aim is to prevent

alien organisms from becoming a threat to valua-ble biodiversity.

5.5.6 Mountains

The ecological status of Norway’s mountain eco-systems varies. Land conversion and land-usechange (for example the construction of holidaycabins and infrastructure for water and windpower) and climate change are expected to putmore pressure on mountain ecosystems in thetime ahead. It is particularly mountain areas nearNorway’s larger towns that are under pressure, asvisitor numbers are increasing and holiday cabinsare being built together with access roads andother infrastructure. On the other hand, mountainareas account for a large proportion of the totalprotected area in Norway. Protected areas andtheir management are discussed in Chapter 7.

The most important instrument for land-useplanning in mountain areas and for ensuring sus-tainable development outside protected areas upto 2020 is the Planning and Building Act, com-bined with the principles of environmental law setout in the Nature Diversity Act. The Governmentexpects the Planning and Building Act to be usedto ensure sound land-use management and tostrike a good balance in cases where there areconflicts of interest in mountain areas generally,and particularly in the buffer zones outside pro-tected areas.

In 2007, to safeguard wild reindeer habitat andensure sustainable development in mountainareas that support wild reindeer, the Ministry ofClimate and Environment set up a programme todraw up regional plans for integrated manage-ment of mountain areas that are particularlyimportant for the survival of wild reindeer in Nor-way (10 national conservation areas have beendesignated). The Government will use theregional reindeer management plans as a basis forsafeguarding wild reindeer and their habitat inconnection with development projects and inmunicipal land-use planning, and to ensure anintegrated approach across municipal and countyboundaries. The regional management plans mustbe followed up with action plans and implementa-tion in relevant municipal master plans. We have asound knowledge of wild reindeer stocks, basedon the biology and ecology of wild reindeer, butthere is disagreement on the cumulative environ-mental effects of all projects and developments inwild reindeer habitat. To clarify what the manage-ment objectives for species set out in the NatureDiversity Act mean in practice for wild reindeer

Figure 5.7 Active and targeted management is needed to maintain biodiversity in cultural landscapes. The effects of grazing vary between species and breeds of livestock because of differences in their feeding preferences. Sheep and goats keep down shrubs, benefiting species that are threatened by overgrowing of open landscapes.

Photo: Jan O. Kiese


and identify which developments have positive ornegative impacts on wild reindeer, the Govern-ment will consider whether to develop a qualitynorm for the species. Application of a qualitynorm could also strengthen the common knowl-edge base for wild reindeer management.

5.5.7 Polar ecosystems

The polar regions are particularly vulnerable to achanging climate, and ecological status in theseareas is increasingly being determined by climatechange and other external pressures such asocean acidification and long-range transport ofpollution. There is also increasing activity in Sval-bard and the northern parts of the Barents Sea.The expansion of activities and industries includ-ing research, education, tourism and space-related activity in Svalbard is expected to con-tinue. This is likely to result in more traffic andactivity, and create new challenges for the authori-ties.

Norway’s environmental targets for Svalbardare particularly ambitious. The aim is to retain theextent of wilderness-like areas and maintain thebiological and landscape diversity virtuallyuntouched by local human activity. The value ofprotected areas as reference areas for researchwill be safeguarded.

The Svalbard Environmental Protection Act,together with regulations under the Act, is themost important instrument for ensuring that thelocal management regime for Svalbard maintainsgood ecological status in the archipelago’s ecosys-tems. Subject to the limitations imposed by inter-national law, the Act applies to the entire land areaof Svalbard and its waters out to the territoriallimit. In most cases, it lays down special provi-sions on environmental protection in Svalbardrather than making the mainland legislation appli-cable. Its purpose is to preserve a virtuallyuntouched environment in Svalbard with respectto continuous areas of wilderness, landscape,flora, fauna and cultural heritage. Within thisframework, it allows for environmentally soundsettlement, research and commercial activities.The Act and its regulations govern most areas ofenvironmental protection in Svalbard, includingprotected areas, activities that may have an envi-ronmental impact, access and passage, protectionof the cultural heritage, land-use planning in thesettlements, local pollution and waste manage-ment, and hunting and fishing. The Governmentwill continue to apply this strict legislation and useit as a tool for adapting the management regime

for Svalbard to a changing climate and a possibleincrease in the activity level.

The comprehensive protection regime andstrict environmental rules set out in the SvalbardEnvironmental Protection Act and regulationsunder the Act are a good starting point for dealingwith challenges that may arise in the future,because intact ecosystems in themselves makenature more resilient to the impacts of climatechange. It is therefore important to maintain thecurrent protection regime.

Important measures have already been intro-duced in Svalbard in response to the decline in theextent of the sea ice, which has made some areasmore accessible and exposed vulnerable speciesand habitats to more traffic and human activity.For example, ships sailing within the protectedareas of Svalbard (which cover most of the territo-rial waters) are now prohibited from carryingheavy bunker oil.

The Government will in the time aheadstrengthen measures to safeguard species andhabitats that may come under increasing pressureas a result of climate change and ocean acidifica-tion combined with other environmental pres-sures. In the case of climate change, this appliesespecially to species that are heavily dependent onice-covered areas of sea, such as the polar bearand Arctic seals, since their distribution maychange considerably and become much morerestricted. A changing climate may result in con-siderable shifts in habitat ranges, and human traf-fic and activities may spread to new areas.Another factor it may be necessary to consider isthe increasing isolation and consequent vulnera-bility of some species and populations as the lossof sea ice weakens links between the islandswithin Svalbard and between Svalbard and Arcticislands and mainland areas further east, such asFranz Josef Land and Novaya Zemlya. These con-siderations must be incorporated into species andhabitat management in Svalbard, and also meanthat it is vital to develop and update the knowl-edge base for the public administration.

The ecosystems in the northern part of theBarents Sea and the northwestern parts of theNorwegian Sea are included in the managementplans for these sea areas. The marginal ice zone,the polar front and areas near Jan Mayen havebeen identified as particularly valuable and vulner-able areas and delimited on the maps in the man-agement plans. Additionally, in the managementplan for the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, the polarfront and the sea areas surrounding Svalbard areidentified and described as particularly valuable


and vulnerable areas, but only the area aroundBjørnøya has been delimited on maps. The loca-tion of both the marginal ice zone and the polarfront is being influenced by climate change, andboth have shifted further northwards. A newassessment of the most appropriate way of delim-iting the marginal ice zone, polar front and seaareas surrounding Svalbard as particularly valua-ble and vulnerable areas will therefore be made aspart of the scientific work leading up to the revi-sion of the management plan for the Barents Sea–Lofoten area in 2020. The marine managementplans are further discussed in Chapter 5.5.1 onmarine and coastal waters.

To ensure sustainable development in the Arc-tic and prevent accidents and harmful releases ofpollutants, it is vital for the shipping industry tomaintain high maritime safety and environmentalstandards. The recently adopted Polar Code setsout specific requirements for ships operating inpolar waters, and enters into force on 1 January2017. The potential increase in maritime trafficaround Svalbard makes it important to ensure agood oil spill preparedness and response system.

Rapid warming is also weakening the climaticbarrier to the spread of alien organisms from tem-perate waters, and there is a growing risk thatsuch organisms may find a foothold and spreadfurther in Svalbard and the Arctic sea areas. Anaction plan to prevent the introduction and spreadof invasive alien species in Svalbard has beendrawn up, and measures to contain, control, eradi-cate and monitor alien species will be imple-mented in line with the priorities set out in theaction plan.

The Government considers it essential to con-tinue concerted and coordinated efforts to limitcumulative effects as far as possible and maintaingood ecological status in polar ecosystems.

5.6 The management plan for the Norwegian Sea

5.6.1 Introduction

The management plan for the Norwegian Sea waspresented in a white paper in 2009 (Report No. 37(2008–2009) to the Storting). The intention was toupdate the management plan for the first time in2014, as was made clear when the Storting consid-ered the white paper.

The scientific basis for the management planupdate was published by the Forum for IntegratedMarine Management, the Forum on Environmen-tal Risk Management and the Advisory Group on

Monitoring in April 2015. It contains updatedinformation on the state of the environment,impacts and pressures, and activities and valuecreation in the Norwegian Sea, and focuses on sig-nificant changes that have taken place since theprevious report was published in 2008.

The report on the scientific basis refers to theoverall conclusion of the 2009 white paper, thatthe state of the Norwegian Sea environment isgenerally good. However, the white paper alsopointed out that management of the area posesconsiderable challenges, particularly as regardsthe impacts of climate change and ocean acidifica-tion, overfishing of certain fish stocks, the risk ofacute pollution, the decline of seabird populationsand the need to protect coral habitats. The newreport concludes that the state of the NorwegianSea environment is still generally good, and themanagement challenges are still much the same.It is difficult to identify any major changes oversuch a short period of time (2009 to 2014). Therehave been no significant changes in activity levelsduring this period.

The next section provides a brief account ofstatus and trends for the marine environment ofthe Norwegian Sea since the management planwas published, as described in the report.

5.6.2 The marine environment – ecological status and trends in the Norwegian Sea

Since 2008, it has been documented that the risingCO2 content of the atmosphere is resulting inmeasurable acidification of the seawater in theNorwegian Sea. It is very uncertain how fast andin which ways climate change and ocean acidifica-tion will affect the Norwegian Sea environment.Studies have shown that the distribution of manybenthic organisms has already shifted northwardsin response to warmer water.

The Norwegian Sea fish community is domi-nated by three pelagic species; herring, mackereland blue whiting. The most important changes infish stocks since 2007 have been the growth of themackerel stock and the expansion of its distribu-tion, the decline in the herring stock after 2009and the decline in the blue whiting stock. How-ever, with strong year classes in 2010 and 2011,the blue whiting stock was higher in 2013 than inthe preceding years.

Trends for seabird populations have generallyremained unchanged after 2008, so that popula-tions that were showing a declining trend havecontinued to decline.


Many new finds of coral reefs and sea pen andsponge communities have been made through theMAREANO programme. Many coral habitatshave also been discovered on the continental shelfin the Norwegian Sea during studies of the sea-bed in connection with planning of petroleumactivities. The new information indicates that cor-als are more widespread in the Norwegian Seathan was assumed in 2008, but that there are stillgaps in our knowledge.

The results of the monitoring programme forpollutants show that the situation in the Norwe-gian Sea is still generally satisfactory, as it was in2008.. The main source of pollution is long-rangetransport with air and ocean currents. Pollutantsspread through the entire management plan area,as is demonstrated by the fact that measurableconcentrations are found even around Jan Mayen.In addition, there are inputs of hazardous sub-stances from local sources.

In some species, hazardous substances havebeen found at concentrations above the thresholdlevels for adverse effects on individual organisms.Surveys have revealed the presence of many newhazardous substances that have not been foundpreviously. Levels of radioactivity in seawater, sed-iments and biota are generally showing a down-ward trend.

Results from the seafood safety monitoringprogramme in the Norwegian Sea show that lev-

els of contaminants are largely below the maxi-mum permitted levels. Seafood from this area isgenerally considered to be safe.

Releases from the Sellafield processing planthave been reduced, resulting in a reduction in lev-els of the radioactive substances technetium (Tc-99) and strontium (Sr-90) in Norwegian waters.Other radionuclides that are monitored are show-ing either a slow downward trend or no change.

Through the MAREANO programme, moreinformation has been obtained on species andhabitats in several of the particularly valuable andvulnerable areas identified in the Norwegian Seamanagement plan: the Iverryggen reef, the Sulareef, the Møre banks and the edge of the conti-nental shelf. More information has also beenobtained on seabirds in the Norwegian Seathrough the seabird programme SEAPOP. Thenew knowledge that has been obtained since thevaluable and vulnerable areas were identified hasconfirmed their value.

There is still considerable fisheries activity inthe following particularly valuable and vulnerableareas: the Møre banks, Halten bank, Sklinnabank, Vestfjorden and parts of the edge of the con-tinental shelf. In the petroleum sector, the mainchange since 2008 is that production licences havebeen awarded for areas closer to several of the val-uable and vulnerable areas: the Froan archipel-ago/Sula reef, the Iverryggen reef, Vestfjorden

Figure 5.8 Kittiwakes.

Photo: Morten Ekker


and parts of the coastal zone. There has beensome exploration drilling along the edge of thecontinental shelf and close to the Sula reef. Therehas been no major change in the volume of ship-ping or the areas used by shipping. The introduc-tion of traffic separation schemes off the coast ofWestern Norway has routed some shipping fur-ther away from the coast, particularly near theMøre banks.

5.6.3 Patterns of activity and pressures and impacts associated with industrial activities

Industrial activities

There are currently 16 oil and gas fields in pro-duction in the Norwegian Sea, as compared with10 in 2008. Oil production from the large fields inthe area is dropping. In 2008, 16 exploration wellswere drilled; the figures for the years 2009–2012were 18, 12, 11 and 7 respectively. Thirteen seis-mic surveys were carried out in each of the fouryears. Discharges of produced water are expectedto fall gradually, to about 2/3 of the 2011 level in2025.

There has been little change as regards mari-time transport in the Norwegian Sea after 2008.Shipping density is highest in the main and sec-ondary fairways along the coast. A little more thanhalf of the total distance sailed in both 2008 and2011 was inside the baseline. The greatest changein traffic patterns is related to the introduction ofthe traffic separation schemes off the coast ofWestern Norway. Oil and chemical tankers andother vessels of gross tonnage 5000 or more fol-low the recommended routes and now sail furtherout from the coast.

Since 2006, the number of fishing vessels hasdropped, but their average size has risen. In 2006,there were 7300 registered fishing vessels in theNorwegian Sea, while in 2011 the number hadbeen reduced to 6252. Fisheries activity is highestin the same areas as before, in shallow bank areas(the Møre, Halten and Sklinna banks), the Sklinn-adjupet trough, and along the edge of the conti-nental shelf. In 2006, the total catch quantity was770 000 tonnes, while in 2012 it was 707 000tonnes; in the intervening years, catches weresomewhat higher, totalling 967 000 tonnes in 2009for example. The most important commercial fishstocks are herring, blue whiting, mackerel, saithe,greater argentine and redfish. Almost all of Nor-way’s fish stocks are shared with other countries.

Long-range transport of pollutants

In 2008, it was concluded that ocean currents andatmospheric transport were the most importantroutes for inputs of pollutants to the NorwegianSea. Other routes/sources are runoff from land,offshore oil and gas production and shipping.Since 2008, the models for inputs of pollution havebeen further developed. More recent calculationsshow that inputs of hazardous substances viaocean currents and atmospheric transport aremuch higher than previously estimated, but it isunlikely that there has been a real increase ininputs. The earlier estimates of inputs of polycy-clic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were unrealis-tically low, and new calculations have given valuesthat are about 50 000 times higher for inputs viaatmospheric transport and about 2400 timeshigher for inputs via ocean currents. The esti-mates for inputs of mercury via ocean currentsare also up to 1000 times higher than before. Forother substances, the changes are considerablysmaller. Thus, the conclusion from 2008 thatocean currents and atmospheric transport are themost important routes has been strengthened.Ocean currents will transport a substantial pro-portion of substances that enter the NorwegianSea on to other areas, but a certain proportion willalso be degraded, stored in sediments orabsorbed by living organisms.

Marine litter

Marine litter in the Norwegian Sea largely origi-nates further south and is transported with oceancurrents, but there are also local inputs fromsources on land and illegally dumped waste fromthe fisheries, the offshore industry, shipping andaquaculture. There is only limited informationabout the quantities of waste in the managementplan area.

Environmental risk

The potential environmental impacts associatedwith oil spills vary considerably from one part ofthe Norwegian Sea to another. The risk of damageto the environment and living marine resourcescaused by acute pollution from the oil and gasfields that are currently producing is for the mostpart considered to be low, because both the proba-bility of accidental discharges to the sea and theprobability of more serious consequences in theevent of a spill are generally low. Requirements forpreventive measures and an emergency prepared-


ness and response system reduce the level of riskfurther.

Since the volume of shipping in the NorwegianSea is not expected to increase significantly, nomarked increase in the probability of spills fromshipping is expected.

Overlapping interests and coexistence between industries

There has been no increase in conflicts of interestbetween industries in the period 2008–2012. Theexpected level of activity in future suggests thatthere will continue to be few conflicts of interest inthe Norwegian Sea.

However, an expansion of petroleum activitiesin the area, the high level of fishing activity, a cer-tain increase in the volume of shipping and grow-ing interest in seafood production may createchallenges and a greater need for coordinated spa-tial management.

5.6.4 Value creation and its importance for Norwegian society

Four sectors are particularly important in the Nor-wegian Sea management plan area – seafood (fish-ing and aquaculture), petroleum, maritime trans-port (including freight, coastal routes and tug-boats) and tourism. According to the updated sci-entific basis, commercial activities in these sec-tors in the management plan area account forabout 24 % of national value added within thesesectors and 19 % of total national employment. Thereport describes value creation in the core activi-ties for the different sectors, and in the largestdirect deliveries to these core activities. Spin-offeffects beyond this have not been assessed andquantified, although there is reason to believe thatthey may be considerable. It should also be notedthat the Norwegian Sea has a value to Norwegiansociety beyond value creation in these industries.However, no attempt has been made to quantifythe value of ecosystem services from the area thatare not included in figures for value creation in thetraditional sense.

5.6.5 Assessment of progress towards goals

The management plan includes a set of goals forthe management of the Norwegian Sea. There areboth general objectives relating to value creationand coexistence between industries, and morespecific goals concerning the conservation andsustainable use of the Norwegian Sea, managing

biodiversity, combating pollution, ensuring safeseafood and the risk of acute pollution.

The updated scientific basis includes a reviewof progress towards these goals using monitoringdata on indicators, information on measures thathave been implemented and other sources ofinformation.

5.6.6 Stakeholder participation

The Forum for Integrated Marine Management hasestablished a website (www.havforum.no) to encour-age the exchange of information on marine manage-ment and stakeholder participation in the work.

Stakeholders were given the opportunity toprovide input to the updated scientific basis forthe Norwegian Sea management plan. The inputthat was received provided valuable supplemen-tary information during the process of updatingthe scientific basis.

5.6.7 Further work on the management of the Norwegian Sea

The Government will update the marine manage-ment plans as needed. An update of a managementplan has a more limited scope than revision, dealingwith a restricted number of issues or part of the geo-graphical area of the management plan. The updatedscientific basis shows that there have been no majorchanges in ecological status or the use of the Norwe-gian Sea since the management plan was publishedin 2009. On this basis, the Government does not con-sider it necessary to update the Norwegian Sea man-agement plan at present. The Government has notreassessed the framework for petroleum activities,but bases its position on its political platform for theperiod 2013–2017 and the four-party cooperationagreement, which state that no petroleum activitiesare to be started in the following areas: around JanMayen, the marginal ice zone, the Skagerrak andthe Møre banks. The marine management plans arefurther discussed in Chapter 5.5.1.

An overall revision of the management plan foreach area will be based on a thorough assessmentof business development, new knowledge, monitor-ing results and other information on long-termchanges in ecosystems. The Government has alsoannounced, most recently in the white paper on theNorth Sea–Skagerrak management plan (Meld. St.37 (2012–2013)), that it intends to carry out anoverall revision of the Norwegian Sea managementplan in 2025 for the period up to 2040.

The Government is basing its work on thistimetable.


6 Safeguarding threatened species and habitats

6.1 Introduction

Some of the Aichi targets are specifically intendedto safeguard threatened species and habitats, par-ticularly target 12, which states that ‘by 2020 theextinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status, particu-larly of those most in decline, has been improvedand sustained’. Norway’s corresponding nationaltarget is that ‘no species or habitat types willbecome extinct or be lost, and the status of threat-ened and near-threatened species and habitattypes will be improved’. The target refers to spe-cies extinction as a consequence of human activ-ity, which does not exclude the possibility thatspecies may be lost as a result of natural pro-cesses. Moreover, it follows from the manage-ment objectives for species and habitat types inthe Nature Diversity Act that habitat and speciesand their genetic diversity are to be maintainedwithin their natural ranges. All these goals are par-ticularly relevant to threatened species and habi-tats, in other words species and habitats that Nor-way risks losing altogether. Neither the nationaltarget nor the management objective for speciesapplies to alien organisms.

Ecosystems are complex, and we often lackinformation about the functions of individual spe-cies in an ecosystem and the interactions betweenthem. In many cases, the impacts of speciesextinction or habitat degradation do not becomeapparent until some time after the damage hasbeen done. On a number of occasions, speciesextinction or a severe population decline in a par-ticular species has proved to have cascadingeffects on other species in the same ecosystemand to cause major changes in the ecosystem as awhole. This means that there are significant risksinvolved in putting so much pressure on speciesand habitats that they at risk of being wiped out.Communities and ecosystems have considerableadaptive capacity, but it is often impossible toknow until afterwards whether or not a systemwill adapt successfully to change.

We know that climate change may result inrapid changes in ecosystems. If there is already a

great deal of pressure on the environment, cli-mate change may be a significant additionalstressor. The risk of major ecosystem change willrise if the cumulative environmental effects of allpressures become too great. Such changes mayalso have substantial social consequences. Actionto safeguard threatened species and habitats willreduce the risk of their loss, and thus prevent pos-sible consequences of their loss that cannot beforeseen.

It is also vital to safeguard species and habitatsin order to give future generations the opportu-nity to utilise resources from nature, includingthose whose potential is currently unknown.

The Government’s proposals in Chapter 5 ofthis white paper are intended to ensure sustaina-ble use and achieve or maintain good ecologicalstatus in Norway’s ecosystems. This is importantfor threatened species and habitats as well. How-ever, it will often be necessary to take more spe-cific and clearly targeted action in addition to safe-guard species and habitats that are at serious risk.International commitments relating to specificspecies or habitats may also mean that Norway isrequired to take appropriate action. If a significantproportion of the population of a species or thearea of habitat type is found in Norway, and actionin Norway can improve its conservation statusglobally or at European level, this can also be animportant reason for Norway to take strongeraction.

In this chapter, the Government proposesmeasures to safeguard threatened species andhabitat types. These include both conservationmeasures to protect species and habitats, andaction to reduce the pressures and impacts associ-ated with individual developments. Chapters 6.2and 6.3 describe the Government’s general pro-posals for safeguarding threatened species andhabitat types respectively, while Chapter 6.4 con-tains more specific proposals for the differentmajor ecosystems. The Government also sets outgeneral principles for selecting which tools andinstruments to use in Chapters 6.2 and 6.3. Beforea decision is made on which tools and instrumentsto use to safeguard a specific threatened species


or habitat, an assessment of any significant eco-nomic and other effects will be carried out in thenormal way, together with a public consultation.The effects of the action to be taken may varywidely depending on what it is intended to safe-guard and what kind of restrictions on use it mayinvolve. After this, the need to safeguard thethreatened species or habitat, the value of associ-ated ecosystem services and the effects on otherpublic interests (as specified in section 14 of theNature Diversity Act) will be weighed againsteach other to determine whether to apply the pro-posed tools and instruments. It is important to tar-get the action taken precisely so that species andhabitats are given adequate protection withoutrestricting other activities that are beneficial tosociety more than necessary. Tools and instru-ments to safeguard threatened species, habitatsand ecosystems should promote coordination andsound use of resources across sectors.

Chapter 6.5 deals specifically with action tosafeguard genetic resources.

6.2 Safeguarding threatened species

To prevent the loss of species, the Governmentwill continue to use both species-based measuressuch as regulating harvesting, protecting individ-ual species, designating priority species and estab-lishing quality norms, and area-based measuresthat are intended to safeguard areas with specificecological functions for a species. The latterinclude protecting areas under the Nature Diver-sity Act, identifying areas with specific ecologicalfunctions for priority species, designating selectedhabitat types, and sectoral measures. The Govern-ment will also seek to prevent the loss of speciesby re-establishing populations and through genebanks and breeding programmes.

The Government will seek to improve the con-servation status of threatened species. This is along-term effort. The Government’s first prioritywill be to improve the conservation status of spe-cies that are critically endangered or endangeredin Norway and that meet the additional criterionthat either a substantial proportion of their Euro-pean population is found in mainland Norway orin Svalbard, or they are threatened globally or inEurope as a whole. There are population targetsfor the four large carnivores (wolf, bear, lynx andwolverine) and golden eagle, which are used inthe management of these species.

In all, the Norwegian Red List of Species con-tains 1120 critically endangered and endangered

species, and for 78 of these, 25 % or more of theEuropean population is believed to be found inNorway. They are mainly plants, fungi and lichensand a number of insects and arachnids, but theyalso include two fish species (spiny dogfish andgolden redfish) and four mammals (hooded seal,wolverine, narwhal and bowhead whale). Most ofthem are associated with forest, cultural land-scapes and mountains, and some with wetlandsand marine and coastal waters. The largest num-bers of critically endangered and endangered for-est species are lichens (13 species) and fungi (11species). Of the 26 mountain species, 16 are vas-cular plants, and they are primarily believed to beunder pressure because of climate change. Thereare five marine species, the two fish species andthree of the mammals. Since many of the 78 spe-cies are mainly mountain species, many of themare found in the counties that include a large pro-portion of mountain areas: Oppland (23 species),Sør-Trøndelag (23 species), Troms (18 species)and Finnmark (18 species).

Of the critically endangered and endangeredspecies in Svalbard, there are six vascular plantsand one lichen where 25 % or more of the Euro-pean population is believed to be found in Norway.

Seventeen of the species that are criticallyendangered or endangered in Norway are in addi-tion threatened globally or at European level.They include plants, insects, lichens, fish, birdsand mammals. In six cases, 25 % or more of theEuropean population is also believed to be in Nor-way. The six species are a bee, Osmia maritima,wolverine, golden redfish, boreal felt lichen(Erioderma pedicellatum), hooded seal and spinydogfish.

In the Government’s view, the most appropri-ate approach for the majority of critically endan-gered and endangered species will be to use area-based measures that target habitats for a numberof species simultaneously, for example protectionunder the Nature Diversity Act or designation ofselected habitat types. Area-based measures willalso be the most important approach for mostother threatened species. Species-based measureswill be used where a species needs protectionagainst direct exploitation or strict protection isneeded. It is essential to assess what is the mosteffective and appropriate approach before select-ing the measures to implement.

Certain habitats, often called hotspots forthreatened species, support large numbers ofthreatened species. By protecting these habitats itis possible to safeguard a number of threatened


species simultaneously. Thus, area-based meas-ures targeting hotspot habitats are generally amore appropriate way of safeguarding threatenedspecies than measures targeting individual spe-cies, provided that the main threat to a species isnot harvesting or other removal. The Governmentwill therefore consider establishing protectedareas under the Nature Diversity Act to coverareas that are hotspots for threatened species.Habitat types for which this may be appropriateare further discussed in Chapter 6.4 for each eco-system.

When areas are protected under the NatureDiversity Act, landowners and holders of rightsare entitled to compensation from the state forfinancial losses incurred when protection makescurrent use of the property more difficult. Theexact restrictions on the use of an area must beassessed on a case-by-case basis when specificprotection proposals are presented, as mentionedin Chapter 6.1. There is already an establishedsystem for voluntary protection of forest areas,and voluntary protection should also be tested inother ecosystems. Protection of areas under theNature Diversity Act is further discussed in Chap-ter 6.4 for each ecosystem.

Habitats that are important for threatened spe-cies can also be designated as selected habitattypes under the Nature Diversity Act. The Gov-ernment will make use of this option if there areso many remaining patches of a particular habitattype that giving other public interests priority insome of these patches will not have a significantbearing on the conservation status of the threat-ened species associated with the habitat. Onesolution that will be considered for such habitatsis to use the Nature Diversity Act to give statutory

protection to some habitat patches, while othersare safeguarded by designation as a selected habi-tat type. In other cases, it may be appropriate touse a combination of sectoral measures and thePlanning and Building Act, perhaps combinedwith the designation of selected habitat types, ifthis gives adequate protection.

The provisions of the Nature Diversity Act onmarine protected areas and selected habitat typesapply in Norway’s territorial waters, in otherwords out to 12 nautical miles beyond the base-line. During work on the management plans forNorway’s sea areas, particularly valuable and vul-nerable areas have been identified, many of whichare at least partly outside Norway’s territorialwaters. Some of these areas are important forthreatened species. The need for measures tosafeguard threatened species in these areas(under the management plans or other legisla-tion) must be assessed in the light of the cumula-tive environmental effects on threatened speciesand habitats and how these are changing, forexample as a result of climate change, ocean acidi-fication and new activities.

The Svalbard Environmental Protection Actapplies to the entire land area of Svalbard and itswaters out to the territorial limit, subject to thelimitations imposed by international law, andincludes provisions both on species-related meas-ures and measures relating to areas with specificecological functions for different species. Fisherypolicy instruments are also important for themarine ecosystem around Svalbard.

In some cases, areas with specific ecologicalfunctions for a species are threatened becausethey are no longer used, which may for exampleresult in open landscapes becoming overgrown.Here, the Government’s primary approach to con-servation will be to use economic instrumentssuch as grants towards grazing or active manage-ment, if appropriate combined with designation ofselected habitat types. Private contracts may be animportant supplement in such cases, particularlyif few landowners are involved.

If area-based measures are not sufficient toensure the survival of a species or are not themost appropriate or effective approach, the Gov-ernment will consider the designation of priorityspecies under the Nature Diversity Act. Thismakes it possible to prohibit all removal of, dam-age to or destruction of the species in question. Asmentioned above, the Government will first con-sider this option for endangered and criticallyendangered species that have a substantial pro-portion of their European population in Norway.

Figure 6.1 The lapwing is now red-listed as endangered in Norway, after a substantial population decline in recent years. The main reason for the decline is changes in agricultural practices.

Photo: Bård Bredesen/Naturarkivet


In doing this, the Government will also be meet-ing the Act’s requirement for the authorities toconsider the designation of priority species incases where there is evidence that the populationstatus or trends for a species are substantially con-trary to the management objective for species.

Designation of priority species is a suitableapproach if there are direct threats to populationsor stands of a species or to areas with specific eco-logical functions for the species. In particular, thisapproach will be considered for highly mobile spe-cies that range over considerable distances,where protection of their entire range would betoo far-reaching, but certain areas with specificecological functions, for example breeding sitesfor birds, can be protected. This may be an appro-priate approach for both bird and mammal spe-cies. Designation of priority species will also beconsidered if statutory protection of the habitatwould be an unnecessarily strict approach to safe-guarding the species or if a species is found inmany small habitat patches and area-based meas-ures would not be effective. Area-based measuressuch as the establishment of protected areas willparticularly be considered for species that arefound in more clearly delimited habitats, such asplants, lichens and fungi, or if species-basedapproaches are not practical, for example for cer-tain insect species. In some cases, designation ofpriority species will be the most appropriate meas-ure for ensuring long-term survival.

The group of threatened species that is theGovernment’s first priority for improvements ofconservation status is defined at the beginning ofChapter 6.2. It is likely that after a further assess-ment of these species, only a minority of them willbe found to be best served by designation as prior-ity species. This is because many of them areplants, insects, lichens and fungi, and habitat con-servation will be more appropriate.

Protection by regulations under the NatureDiversity Act is a suitable way of safeguardingspecies of plants, fungi and invertebrates that aremainly threatened by harvesting or otherremoval. However, most such species are alreadyprotected under the existing regulations. Terres-trial mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians(collectively called wildlife species) are protectedunless designated as game species. Wildlife spe-cies, salmonids and freshwater fish and marinespecies that are threatened by harvesting will besafeguarded by means of stricter restrictions onharvesting and on the use of fishing gear andother equipment, or if necessary by prohibitingharvesting, until their stocks recover. For exam-

ple, no fishing is currently permitted for Europeaneel, blue ling or golden redfish (see Chapter6.4.1). In some cases, a longer stock rebuildingperiod may be accepted after consideration ofother important public interests.

The report on experience of the application ofthe Nature Diversity Act (see Chapter 5.2) showsthat there is so far little information on what effectdesignation as a priority species has in practice.Monitoring results are available for some species,for example the Arctic fox. The Ministry of Cli-mate and Environment will continue these moni-toring programmes. The Ministry will follow pop-ulation trends for priority species generally, andthe effects of designating priority species will beassessed after the system has been operative forsome years. As far as possible, this assessmentwill be based on monitoring data.

Regardless of other action and policy instru-ments, the presence of threatened species andtheir habitats will be an important considerationin decisions about matters that may have a nega-tive impact on these species, for example in plan-ning processes under the Planning and BuildingAct and decisions under sectoral legislation. Dur-ing the decision-making process, the degree ofthreat to a species must be weighed against otherpublic interests. The more seriously threatened aspecies is, the more weight must be given to themanagement objective for species set out in theNature Diversity Act. Each sector is responsiblefor incorporating this approach appropriately intosectoral legislation and guidance.

Transport projects can have serious negativeimpacts on threatened species in the areaaffected, and the transport authorities will furtherdevelop routines and guidance for the sector. Forexample, guidance on the environmental impactassessment of road projects will be updated.

Environmental crime also adds to pressureson a number of threatened species. The inspec-tion and enforcement work of the NorwegianNature Inspectorate and targeted use of the envi-ronmental coordinator system in the police ser-vice facilitates the exposure of such crime so thatit can be prosecuted. Norway will continue itsefforts to combat fisheries crime at national andinternational level.

Action on climate change, ocean acidificationand long-range transport of pollution does notcome within the scope of this white paper, but willin many cases also be very important for safe-guarding threatened species and habitats. Otherconservation measures may increase species’resilience to climate change. The Government will


assess adaptation of the nature managementregime to boost resilience.

To safeguard threatened species, the Government will:

• Make use of statutory protection and the designa-tion of selected habitat types and priority speciesunder the Nature Diversity Act to provide long-term safeguards for threatened species and areaswith specific ecological functions for these spe-cies. In the first instance, these measures will beused to improve the conservation status of speciesthat are critically endangered or endangered inNorway and that meet the additional criterionthat either a substantial proportion of their Euro-pean population is found in Norway, or they arealso threatened globally or in Europe as a whole.

• Ensure that the situation of threatened species istaken into account when central governmentauthority is exercised, for example in decisionsunder sectoral legislation, when adopting centralgovernment plans under the Planning and Buil-ding Act, and when allocating grant funding.

• By providing guidance and in other ways,encourage the counties and municipalities totake the situation of threatened species into acco-unt when exercising their authority, for examplewhen adopting plans under the Planning andBuilding Act, making decisions under sectorallegislation and allocating grant funding.

• Consider the implications of climate change andocean acidification for the management of threa-tened species, and adapt the management regimeaccordingly.

• Take steps to improve cooperation between thepolice and the inspection and enforcement autho-rities.

6.3 Safeguarding threatened habitats

As is the case for threatened species, the choice ofmeasures to safeguard threatened habitats willdepend on the range of pressures and impactsaffecting a particular habitat type.

Unlike populations of a species, which canoften recover if the right types of measures arechosen, an area of threatened habitat that isdestroyed is often lost for ever. Re-establishing anarea of habitat is much more costly than prevent-ing its degradation, and designation of selectedhabitat types is one approach that can be used toavoid serious negative trends for habitats. Norwaycurrently has a list of 40 habitat types that are con-sidered to be threatened (i.e. have been placed in

one of the categories critically endangered, endan-gered or vulnerable). Many of them are alsoimportant habitats for threatened species.

The Government will use protection of areasand designation of selected habitat types underthe Nature Diversity Act, combined with sectorallegislation and grant schemes, to safeguardthreatened habitat types. Statutory protection ofareas will be considered if there are very fewremaining patches of a habitat type and for habitatpatches where ecological status is particularlygood.

If the main threat to a habitat type is one par-ticular activity that can be restricted tightlyenough and over the long term using the relevantsectoral legislation, this approach will often pro-vide good enough safeguards.

The Nature Diversity Act provides the legalauthority for designating selected habitat types.One of the important factors when decidingwhether to designate a selected habitat type iswhether the status or trends for the type in ques-tion are contrary to the Act’s management objec-tives for habitat types. The Government will con-sider the possibility of designation of selected hab-itat types for each of the threatened habitat types.Under the Nature Diversity Act, special accountmust be taken of selected habitat types when con-servation interests and other public interests areweighed against each other during decision-mak-ing processes. The different interests are consid-ered within the framework of the relevant sectorallegislation. Designation of selected habitat typesis therefore generally a good cross-sectoral instru-ment. In addition, the Government considers itpositive that this is an instrument that promoteslocal autonomy and opportunities for municipali-ties to safeguard habitats through their land-useplanning processes. The Government also empha-sises the importance of assessing the suitability ofselected habitat designation on a case-by-casebasis. One element of this assessment should beto consider whether it is possible to integrate theprocess of weighing up conservation interestsagainst other public interests for selected habitattypes into sectoral instruments, either legal oreconomic instruments or both, or sectoral plan-ning tools.

Designation of selected habitat types can alsobe useful in the case of habitat types that arethreatened because they are no longer being usedand actively managed. One proviso is that theremust be other measures that can be used toencourage active management, for example grantschemes for maintaining cultural landscapes or


threatened habitat types. Funding is limited, butwithin the framework of each grant scheme andthe other considerations to which it gives weight,it is possible to give higher priority to the mostvaluable areas of a habitat type and to areas whereprivate stakeholders are interested in carrying outhabitat management with support from the publicsector. Designation of a selected habitat type doesnot oblige the authorities to provide funding, butsuch habitats are likely to be given priority whenfunding is allocated. The presence of patches ofselected habitat types will also be an importantconsideration if there is a possibility of land-usechange at a later date.

Another important consideration for the Gov-ernment is whether there are so many patches ofa habitat type that the loss of some of them is con-sidered to be acceptable. The size of the habitatpatches may be another element of the assess-ment. Designation as a selected habitat type mayfor example be useful if there are many small hab-itat patches, and it would not be effective to carryout comprehensive protection procedures for allof these. It can also be a useful tool for largerareas, especially since the requirement to takespecial account of selected habitat types does notnecessarily mean that the whole area must be pro-tected. The management regime for selected habi-tat types does not prohibit a range of activities inthe same way as the rules for protected areasestablished under the Nature Diversity Act. How aselected habitat type should be safeguarded willdepend on what kind of threat there is to the habi-tat type and whether activities carried out inaccordance with sectoral legislation can beadapted to take account of this.

When designating selected habitat types, theGovernment will also consider whether all areasof a habitat type should be included, or only thoseof highest ecological status. Important considera-tions here will be whether there are so manypatches of the habitat type that only the best ofthem need to be included, and whether it is realis-tic for example to give priority to funding for habi-tat management for all of them. If there are rela-tively few high-quality habitat patches, but there isconsiderable potential for improving ecologicalstatus at other sites by habitat management, thisshould also be taken into consideration.

The report on experience of the application ofthe Nature Diversity Act (see Chapter 5.2) showsthat there is so far little information on what effectdesignation as a selected habitat type has in prac-tice. Some information to supplement the reportcan be obtained from statistics on the number of

localities where habitat management is being car-ried out with funding through the grant schemefor threatened habitats. For example, in 2015grants for habitat management were awarded for560 (of 1275) of the traditional hay meadow locali-ties. Hay meadows have been designated as aselected habitat type. In most cases, long-termagreements have been concluded with the land-owners. The Ministry of Climate and Environ-ment will continue to monitor trends in selectedhabitat types, and the effects of designatingselected habitat types will be assessed after thesystem has been operative for some years. As faras possible, this assessment should be based onmonitoring data.

Regardless of other action and policy instru-ments, the presence of threatened habitats will bean important consideration in decisions aboutmatters that may have a negative impact on thesehabitats, for example in planning processes underthe Planning and Building Act and decisionsunder sectoral legislation. During the decision-making process, the degree of threat to a habitatmust be weighed against other public interests.The more seriously threatened a habitat type is,the more weight must be given to the manage-ment objectives for habitats in the Nature Diver-sity Act when decisions are made under other leg-islation. Each sector is responsible for incorporat-ing this approach appropriately into sectoral legis-lation and guidance.

Projects in the transport sector can have seri-ous negative impacts on patches of threatenedhabitat types, and the transport authorities willfurther develop routines and guidance for the sec-tor so that adverse impacts can be assessed andavoided.

In some cases, the main threat to a habitattype will be climate change, ocean acidification orother types of large-scale environmental change.This is particularly true of some polar and alpinehabitats, but climate change is expected tobecome a growing threat in other regions as well.The Government will therefore assess adaptationof the nature management regime so that othermeasures can be used to boost the resilience ofthreatened habitat types to such pressures.

To safeguard threatened habitats, the Government will:

• Consider designating threatened habitats as sele-cted habitat types where this is considered to bean appropriate approach.


• Make use of statutory protection under theNature Diversity Act if there are very few patchesof a threatened habitat or their ecological statusis particularly good.

• Use sectoral legislation where appropriate to takeaction, both of a long-term nature and as a rapidresponse where necessary, to safeguard habitatsthat are mainly threatened by one particularactivity.

• Ensure that the situation of threatened habitatsis taken into account when central governmentauthority is exercised, for example in decisionsunder sectoral legislation, when adopting centralgovernment plans under the Planning and Buil-ding Act, and when allocating grant funding.

• By providing guidance and in other ways,encourage the counties and municipalities totake the situation of habitats into account whenexercising their authority, for example whenadopting plans under the Planning and BuildingAct, making decisions under sectoral legislationand allocating grant funding.

• Consider the implications of climate change andocean acidification for the management of threa-tened habitats, and adapt their managementaccordingly

6.4 Safeguarding threatened species and habitats in each of Norway’s major ecosystems


Threatened species and habitats in marine andcoastal waters are safeguarded in various ways,based on both sectoral instruments and environ-mental policy instruments. Threatened marinespecies and habitats are an important element ofthe work on the management plans for Norway’ssea areas. Based on experience gained from thedesignation of dwarf eelgrass (Zostera noltei) as apriority species, the Government will assesswhich other threatened marine species should besafeguarded in the same way. A review is to becarried out to determine which threatened marinehabitats should be designated as selected habitattypes. The establishment of marine protectedareas under the Nature Diversity Act or sectorallegislation for a representative selection of marinehabitats (see Chapter 7.3.1) will be important insafeguarding marine habitats and species. Chap-ter 5.2 discusses the geographical scope of theNature Diversity Act, which delimits where thesemeasures can be used.

Norway has a knowledge-based fisheries man-agement regime, which is intended to ensure thatthe framework for commercial fisheries is as sus-tainable as possible. Directed fisheries for threat-ened species including European eel, blue lingand golden redfish have been closed. Most of theother threatened fish species are sharks, skatesand rays. Although no direct fishery is permittedfor these species, bycatches in other fisheries area threat to several of them. The Ministry of Trade,Industry and Fisheries will continue efforts to sur-vey the scale of bycatches and reduce bycatchesof threatened species. Further knowledge will bebuilt up on stocks, fishing techniques and fishinggear so that bycatches of threatened species anddamage to threatened habitat types can bereduced. Bilateral and international cooperation isessential to ensure that shared stocks are fishedsustainably, and Norway will continue to give highpriority to such cooperation. Cooperation withRussia and the EU on the management of sharedstocks is particularly important. The Governmentwill also consider whether further improvementsto the status of threatened fish species can beachieved through action on the basis of other sec-toral instruments. Monitoring and a ban on har-vesting will be continued for threatened whalespecies.

Norway’s seabird populations are changing;many are declining steeply, but not all of them.Norway has internationally important populationsof a number of seabirds, and has a special respon-sibility for the populations of fulmar, cormorant(subspecies Phalacrocorax carbo carbo), shag,king eider, common gull, lesser black-backed gull(subspecies Larus fuscus fuscus), glaucous gull,great black-backed gull, ivory gull, Brünnich’sguillemot, little auk, black guillemot and puffin.More than 25 % of the European breeding popula-tion of all of these species is found in Norway.

A number of Norway’s seabird populations arethreatened, and action needs to be taken to givethem better protection. It has been pointed outthat management measures at two levels need tobe considered – both measures that target threat-ened seabird populations directly, and ecosystem-based measures, where seabirds are consideredas an integral part of the ecosystem.

Measures that target threatened populationsdirectly can include action to reduce pressuressuch as predation (for example by mink),unwanted bycatches and disturbance. These mustbe adapted to different species and sites to makethem as effective as possible. Action to reduce themink population along the shoreline and on


coastal islands and skerries will be intensified.Surveys of bycatches and efforts to reduce thescale of seabird bycatches in the fisheries will becontinued. For example, the introduction of spe-cific requirements relating to gear and catchmethods will be considered in fisheries or areaswhere bycatches of seabirds are a problem.

Apart from measures to safeguard threatenedpopulations, management measures for seabirdsshould primarily form part of an ecosystem-basedmanagement regime. It is essential to ensure thatseabirds, and many other predators in marine eco-systems, have adequate food supplies in the formof small plankton-feeding fish (fish larvae andsmall schooling fish species) and larger zooplank-ton such as Arctic krill species. In coastal waters,healthy kelp forests are vital for seabirds andother biodiversity and biological production.

As part of the follow-up to the white paper onthe first update of the Barents Sea–Lofoten man-agement plan (Meld. St. 10 (2010–2011)), unin-tentional bycatches of seabirds during longliningfor Greenland halibut and gill netting for lump-sucker have been systematically registered. Theaim is to quantify unintentional bycatches of sea-birds and review possible preventive measures.

Norway has an extensive monitoring systemfor marine ecosystems, and has also developed agood seabird monitoring programme. These mustbe maintained to provide information on statusand trends for populations of marine species, and

the results must be linked to knowledge devel-oped about the factors that affect seabird popula-tions and the effect of measures to safeguardthem. Long time series of data are vital to thiswork. Long-term mapping and monitoring of sea-birds is organised through the SEAPOP pro-gramme, which also includes studies of the areasused by seabirds at different times of year. TheGovernment will continue and further developsystematic mapping and monitoring of seabirdpopulations in all Norway’s sea areas through theSEAPOP programme. The development of knowl-edge about seabirds and their food supplies willcontinue, and measures that can improve foodavailability for seabirds will be assessed. Thiswork will involve cooperation between seabirdexperts, marine scientists and the public adminis-tration.

The Pacific oyster is an alien species in Nor-way, and is a new and growing threat to the Euro-pean flat oyster in Norway. The Norwegian Biodi-versity Information Centre has assessed thePacific oyster and considers that there is a veryhigh risk that it will displace native Norwegianspecies. The Government will complete andimplement an action plan for containing and con-trolling the Pacific oyster.

The most seriously threatened of Norway’smarine habitats at present is sugar kelp forest,and its ecological status is particularly poor alongthe Skagerrak coast. This is believed to be due to

Figure 6.2 A marine food web

Simplified illustration of a marine food web. Small plankton-feeding fish (fish larvae and small schooling fish species) and largerzooplankton species (krill and amphipods) play a key role in energy flow through the ecosystem to higher trophic levels – largerfish, seabirds, marine mammals and humans. Ecosystem-based management is vital for maintaining ecosystem integrity.

Small plankton-feeding fish Herring and mackerel

Zooplankton

Phytoplankton

Jellyfish

Seabirds Cod

Humans

Whales Bluefin tuna


higher inputs of nutrients and more sediment dep-osition combined with climate change, which isresulting in higher runoff of nutrients and particu-late matter from land. Action to improve the situa-tion will include measures that are part of theriver basin management plans and, where rele-vant, measures in municipal action plans for cli-mate change adaptation. The Government willalso review other possible measures for reducinginputs of nutrients and particulate matter toimportant sugar kelp areas, including climatechange adaptation measures for extreme precipi-tation events. A pilot project to re-establish sugarkelp forest will be initiated. International coopera-tion is also of crucial importance.

There are substantial inputs of nutrients to theNorwegian Skagerrak coast with ocean currents.Norway will continue to give high priority to envi-ronmental cooperation with the North Sea andBaltic Sea countries, including cooperation withinOSPAR and the EEA Agreement.

The Government will also intensify efforts toprotect threatened marine habitats including cold-water coral reefs, which are particularly vulnera-ble to physical damage, sediment deposition, cli-mate change and ocean acidification. Nine coralreefs have already received special protection

against fishing using gear that is towed along theseabed. Work is in progress to protect more coralreefs in this way, and a public consultation on pro-posals to protect 10 more areas was held in 2015.The aim is to establish new protected areas in2016.

The environmental and fisheries authoritieswill together evaluate how instruments and meas-ures in the two sectors contribute to the conserva-tion of marine habitat types and whether furthermeasures should be implemented.

The environmental and fisheries authoritieswill also evaluate how information on threatenedmarine habitats should be made available to andutilised by user groups. This can help to ensurethat adequate information is available during activ-ities such as commercial fisheries. The evaluationwill specifically include information about the dis-tribution of coral habitats.

In the petroleum sector, requirements to mapcoral reefs and to take steps to prevent sedimentdeposition and physical damage to coral reefs andother benthic communities help to prevent dam-age to threatened marine habitats.

It is important to continue mapping pro-grammes and build up knowledge about cumula-tive environmental effects in order to address

Figure 6.3 A new reef complex was discovered off Sandnessjøen (Nordland) in autumn 2015. Two of the species that form the reef, the stony coral Lophelia pertusa (white) and the gorgonian Primnoa resedae-formis (orange) can be seen here. Banning bottom trawling is one important way of safeguarding coral reefs.

Photo: MAREANO/Institute of Marine Research


pressures and impacts associated with the fisher-ies, petroleum industry and other activities. Man-agement of the marine environment will be basedon the best available knowledge about cumulativeenvironmental effects in order to safeguardthreatened species and habitats as effectively aspossible.

The marine management plans also focus onthe conservation of threatened species and habi-tats. In addition, relevant sectoral legislation con-tains provisions that are important in protectingthreatened species and habitats against pressuresand impacts associated with activities such as fish-eries, the petroleum industry and maritime trans-port. The Government will give weight to safe-guarding threatened marine species and habitatsin the further development of the managementplans for Norway’s sea areas.


The Water Resources Act and the WatercourseRegulation Act are important tools for safeguard-ing threatened species and habitats in river sys-tems, both when new developments are plannedand when taking steps to improve ecological sta-tus in rivers where there are already hydropowerdevelopments. When hydropower licences arerevised in the years ahead, it will be important tolook at possible ways of improving conditions forthreatened species and habitats that are affectedby hydropower developments. The competentauthorities will also make more active use of theoption of requiring licensing of older non-licensedhydropower developments to reduce damage tothreatened species and habitats. In addition, theenergy authorities and the environmental authori-ties will make more active use of the standardnature management conditions in licences torequire action to reduce damage to threatenedspecies and habitats.

No fishing for eels is permitted in Norwaybecause there is concern about the population sta-tus of the species in Europe as a whole. Othermethods of reducing the negative impacts ofhuman activity on eels have also been reviewed,including steps to reduce barriers to migration inrivers. The environmental authorities, in coopera-tion with other relevant authorities, will considerhow to respond to the proposals in the review.

In line with the general principles for selectingtools and instruments to safeguard threatenedspecies and habitats set out in Chapters 6.2 and6.3, the Government will use a combination ofdesignation of selected habitat types and pro-

tected areas, as well as relevant sectoral legisla-tion and the Planning and Building Act, to safe-guard threatened habitats and habitats that areimportant for threatened species in rivers andlakes. These include inland deltas, oxbow lakesand other features of meandering rivers, largesand and gravel banks, the spray zone near water-falls, calcareous lakes and lakes and ponds thatare naturally free of fish. The Government willgive priority to areas that are already protectedagainst hydropower developments or where it isnot realistic for other reasons to carry out hydro-power developments. Calcareous lakes havealready been designated as a selected habitattype, and the Government will consider the estab-lishment of protected areas as a supplement forcertain of these lakes. Oxbow lakes and other fea-tures of meandering rivers are considered to beparticularly poorly served by conservation meas-ures so far, given their significance for severalimportant species groups. The Government willtherefore give priority to these habitats. Theestablishment of protected areas in freshwaterhabitats is also discussed in Chapter 7.3.2.

The Government will continue measures thathave been initiated to deal with particularly inva-sive alien organisms in Norwegian rivers andlakes. These include action to deal with signalcrayfish, pike (outside its natural range) andCanadian and Nuttall’s pondweeds. Informationactivities are also important for preventing the ille-gal release of fish and avoiding the spread of inva-sive organisms with boats and fishing gear.

In addition to land-use change, pollution putspressure on threatened species in rivers andlakes. Acidification, nutrient runoff from agricul-tural areas and industrial releases can all havenegative impacts, either separately or in combina-tion. The Government will therefore continue itsefforts to prevent pollution from harming threat-ened freshwater species.

6.4.3 Wetlands

Pressures on wetland species and habitats arelargely associated with various forms of land con-version and land-use change or with pollution. Inline with the general principles for selecting toolsand instruments to safeguard threatened speciesand habitats set out in Chapters 6.2 and 6.3, theGovernment therefore considers that area-basedmeasures will be the most important approach tosafeguarding threatened wetland species and hab-itats. They will also make a contribution to climatechange adaptation.


In accordance with its general policy forthreatened species and habitats, see Chapters 6.1and 6.3, the Government will in the case of wet-land ecosystems particularly consider the protec-tion of selected breeding, staging and moultingareas for critically endangered and endangeredbird species. In some cases, it may be appropriateto designate priority wetland species, see the cri-teria for this in Chapter 6.2. The Government willalso consider protection under the Nature Diver-sity Act for selected lime-rich lowland mires,which are particularly important for threatenedspecies. To safeguard patches of threatened wet-land habitats that are not given statutory protec-tion under the Nature Diversity Act, the Govern-ment will consider the designation of selectedhabitat types. Further, the Government will givepriority to habitat management in protected wet-land areas in order to improve the conservationstatus of threatened species, and will continue andstep up peatland restoration as a climate policyand biodiversity measure, both within and outsideprotected areas. Peatland restoration can alsohelp to improve the conservation status of threat-ened species.

Hay fens are a threatened habitat and alreadydesignated as a selected habitat type. The Govern-ment will continue existing grant schemes so thatmore sites can be safeguarded, and will monitortrends in land use for this habitat type and assesswhether stricter protection of a large number ofsites is necessary.

The Government will consider the designationof more threatened wetland habitats as selectedhabitat types, particularly raised bogs, ombro-trophic mires near the coast, lowland spring fensand active marine deltas. Conservation measuresfor palsa mires are considered to be adequate pro-vided that the county conservation plan for wet-lands for Finnmark is implemented, see Chapter7.3.3. Further protection measures would proba-bly not safeguard the palsa mires any more satis-factorily, since they are threatened mainly by cli-mate change.

6.4.4 Forest

Many of the critically endangered and endan-gered species associated with forests belong tospecies groups that are found in fairly clearlydelimited habitats. The main threats are related toland use (forestry) and land conversion, not toharvesting and other removal. In line with thegeneral principles for selecting tools and instru-ments to safeguard threatened species and habi-

tats discussed earlier, suitable approaches forsafeguarding threatened forest species are area-based measures such as establishing protectedareas, setting aside key biotopes that are not to befelled, and designating selected habitat types andpriority species (together with areas with specificecological functions for these species).

Key biotopes that are set aside and not felledsafeguard habitats for threatened and near-threat-ened species, and this has positive effects onmany species. By 2015, about 70 000 areas cover-ing a total area of about 750 square kilometres hadbeen identified as key biotopes through environ-mental inventories. This corresponds to almost1 % of the total area of productive forest. Sinceenvironmental inventories have not yet been car-ried out for all forest properties, the proportion ofproductive forest set aside as key biotopes isexpected to increase.

The Government’s position is that protectingmore forest will have substantial positive effectson a large proportion of the threatened forest spe-cies in the areas concerned. Forest protection isintended to safeguard areas that are important forthreatened species and to build up networks ofprotected areas including a representative selec-tion of different forest types, geographical areasand climatic conditions. Thus, establishing naturereserves in forest areas is an effective way of safe-guarding a large number of threatened speciesthat require a wide range of different ecologicalniches and are found in many different geographi-cal areas. There is a need to expand protection offorest areas, see Chapter 7.

Forest habitats that are important for threat-ened species and should be safeguarded by pro-tection under the Nature Diversity Act includelime-rich broad-leaved forest (oak, beech andlime) and several types of old-growth forest.

The area-based measures discussed above willnot adequately safeguard all threatened forest spe-cies. Certain species have such small populationsthat chance events could cause their extinction inNorway. For these, the Government will considerdesignation as priority species. This is dependenton adequate information about the species in ques-tion. Designation as priority species or species pro-tection will also be considered for species that aremainly threatened by direct exploitation (for exam-ple that are collected or harvested for sale). Finally,designation as priority species will be consideredfor some wildlife species that are not particularlyclosely associated with one specific habitat.

The problems that can arise when cervid pop-ulations become too large are mentioned in Chap-


ter 5. There is little to suggest that large cervidpopulations alone are the reason why any speciesare threatened. However, the general elements ofcervid management described in Chapter 5.5 willreduce any negative impacts of cervids, whichmay also benefit threatened species.

Management of the threatened forest-dwellinglarge carnivores (wolf, brown bear and lynx) andthe golden eagle is based on the Bern Convention,the Nature Diversity Act and the 2004 and 2011national cross-party agreements on carnivoremanagement. The 2011 agreement specifies thatthere must be a clear division into zones wherethe carnivores are given priority and others wherelivestock have priority.

The regional carnivore management boardsare responsible for drawing up carnivore manage-ment plans and updating them regularly. Theplans must clearly identify the zones where carni-vores have priority and those where livestockhave priority. They must also set out proposals forthe use of funding on measures to prevent andreduce carnivore-human conflicts in accordancewith the dual goals of the management regime.The management plan areas are not based onmunicipal or county boundaries.

The carnivore and livestock zones in the man-agement plans can be adjusted to separate carni-vores and livestock even more clearly, both spa-tially and temporally. This will create a more pre-dictable situation for livestock farmers and help inachieving the population targets for the large car-nivores. With this in mind, the management plansmust 1) seek the optimal spatial coordination ofcarnivore and livestock zones between regionsand in cross-border areas, 2) ensure that carni-vore breeding zones overlap as far as possible,and 3) take into account carnivore biology, distri-bution and population connectivity and the availa-bility of suitable habitat. Livestock zones shouldbe delimited so that they are continuous, providefor predictability in carnivore management andmake livestock farming viable in practice.

Several habitat types in Norwegian forests arethreatened. One of them, calcareous lime forest, isconsidered to be vulnerable and is already aselected habitat type. Other threatened habitattypes include coastal spruce and pine forest (alarge proportion of their range is in Norway) andforest types that are spring-fed or on calcareoussoils. A number of these habitats are also impor-tant for threatened species. The most importantpressures vary from one habitat to another, butinclude forestry, land conversion and mining.

The Government will consider whether to des-ignate more selected habitat types in forest. Sincethere are a number of pressures on such habitats,and they are regulated under different legislation(including the Forestry Act, the Water ResourcesAct, the Watercourse Regulation Act, the EnergyAct, the Mineral Resources Act and the Planningand Building Act), the Government’s view is thatthe cross-sectoral approach required for selectedhabitat types will have a positive effect on theseforest habitats. However, designation of selectedhabitat types does not afford strict protection. Forthreatened habitats that are only found at a fewlocalities in Norway, such as forest on ultramaficsoils and beech and lime forest on lime-rich soils,and for particularly valuable areas of all threat-ened forest habitat types, the Government willtherefore consider protection of areas under theNature Diversity Act as well as or instead of desig-nation of selected habitat types.


The main threat to most species and habitats inthe cultural landscape is the discontinuation ofactive use (grazing and haymaking), followed byovergrowing of the open landscape. The Govern-ment’s main approach to safeguarding threatenedspecies and habitats in the cultural landscape istherefore to provide a framework that encouragesgrazing on a commercial basis (using schemesthat are part of the Agricultural Agreement), incombination with grant schemes to promote habi-tat management and grazing where there arethreatened habitats.

Intensification of agriculture and land-usechanges can also have negative impacts on cul-tural landscapes.

The conversion of agricultural areas for otherpurposes can result in habitat fragmentation andreduce the connectivity of ecological networksand natural corridors in cultural landscapes. Toreduce the negative impacts on threatened spe-cies, the Government will promote the use ofcoordinated regional land-use and transport plans.This will also reduce the pressure for new cultiva-tion of other areas, which may include importanthabitats. In a few cases, designation of priorityspecies associated with the cultural landscapemay also be appropriate, in accordance with thecriteria set out in Chapter 6.2.

Three semi-natural habitats – hay meadows,hay fens and coastal heathland – have alreadybeen designated as selected habitat types. Haymeadows have been a selected habitat type since


2011, and have shown a positive trend, with anincrease in the number of sites that are beingactively managed. This is partly because it is pos-sible to apply for grants for habitat management ofselected habitat types. The Government will usethe experience that has been gained as part of thebasis for assessing whether designation ofselected habitat types is a suitable measure forother threatened habitats associated with culturallandscapes.

One problem for many of the species associ-ated with hay meadows is that these are isolatedhabitat islands, often at considerable distancesfrom each other. The Ministry of Climate andEnvironment will in consultation with other rele-vant ministries consider which other types ofareas, for example species-rich road verges, canfunction as part of ecological networks.

Invasive alien species are already having anegative impact on several habitats in culturallandscapes, such as sand dunes, open areas onshallow lime-rich soils and semi-natural meadows.The Ministry of Climate and Environment willtherefore in consultation with other relevant min-istries identify pathways of introduction and par-ticularly vulnerable areas and habitats in culturallandscapes, so that action can be taken specificallyto prevent the spread of invasive alien species.

A combination of general measures to pro-mote the maintenance of farming activities andmeasures specifically to safeguard particularlyvaluable areas, together with information activi-ties, will have the greatest positive effect onthreatened species and habitats in cultural land-scapes. The scheme for selected agricultural land-scapes is a good example of the second category,and is designed to safeguard a representativeselection of valuable Norwegian agricultural land-scapes. Under the scheme, multi-year agreementsare concluded with landowners, who undertake tomanage the land in a way that safeguards both theoverall cultural landscape and the threatened spe-cies and habitats in the areas. The Governmenttherefore intends to continue the scheme.

There are also some naturally open lowlandhabitats, and the main threats to these are oftenphysical disturbance and pollution. Open lowlandareas are often important elements of the land-scape in addition to supporting threatened spe-cies, so that establishing protected areas underthe Nature Diversity Act can be an importantmeasure. The Government will therefore reviewopen lowland areas where there are threatenedhabitat types, and consider whether the protectionof areas is an appropriate step.

6.4.6 Mountains

Considerable areas of the Norwegian mountainsare already protected as national parks or othertypes of protected areas. Many of the threatenedmountain species are found in these areas. Only asmall number of developments might be enoughto cause the regional extinction of or a seriouspopulation decline in these species. More thanhalf of the threatened mountain species (34 of 64species), and most of the threatened mosses andvascular plants, are found in lime-rich areas. TheGovernment therefore considers it important tomap lime-rich areas in the mountains in moredetail to develop an overview of any such areasoutside the existing protected areas. If there aremany lime-rich areas and threatened species thatare not adequately safeguarded by the existingprotected areas, the Government will considerprotection under the Nature Diversity Act for themost important localities and designation asselected habitat types for the rest. Moreover, theMinistry of Climate and Environment and otherrelevant ministries will provide clear guidance onhow to safeguard valuable and threatened moun-tain species and habitats, and species that needlarge, continuous areas of habitat, with referenceto sectoral legislation and the Planning and Build-ing Act.

Caves have been identified as a threatenedhabitat type in Norway. The Government pro-poses designation as a selected habitat type as away of safeguarding caves that are affected byquarrying, land-use changes, hydropower devel-opments and pollution. However, designation as aselected habitat type does not make it possible toregulate access, tourism and other recreationaluses. The Government will therefore considerprotection under the Nature Diversity Act andrestrictions on access for localities where this isthe main pressure. Restrictions on access shouldbe accompanied by a strategy for visitor access toeach cave to ensure a good balance between con-servation and use.

Management of the threatened large carni-vores and golden eagle in the mountains is basedon the Bern Convention, the Nature Diversity Actand the 2004 and 2011 national cross-party agree-ments on carnivore management. Culling of wol-verine by licensed hunters is not effective enoughat present, and the Government therefore wishesto test some new measures to improve the effi-ciency of the cull. The Government’s policy formanagement of large forest carnivores isdescribed in Chapter 6.4.4.



General efforts to maintain good ecological statusin polar ecosystems are described in Chapter 5,and will also be the most important way of safe-guarding threatened species and habitats in thepolar regions. Many of the instruments describedin Chapter 5 will also be appropriate for targetedmeasures to safeguard threatened species andhabitats. Climate change is a rapidly growingthreat to species and habitats in Svalbard, and inaddition there has been an expansion of manytypes of activities both in and around the archipel-ago. The Government will adapt the managementof Svalbard to these changes.

In Svalbard, the strict regime under the Sval-bard Environmental Protection Act and associatedregulations, and the extensive protected areas,provide a high level of protection against environ-mental pressures from local activity. The landareas and territorial waters of Jan Mayen (exceptfor two areas where human activity is permitted)have been designated as a nature reserve. Thisalso helps to protect threatened species and habi-tats in Svalbard and on Jan Mayen. Measures tosafeguard threatened species and habitats will beincorporated into the management plans for thelarge protected areas in Svalbard in the light of cli-mate and environmental change and changes inhuman activity. Outside the protected areas,threatened species and habitats will be furthersafeguarded through targeted application of theSvalbard Environmental Protection Act wherenecessary to counteract environmental pressures.

The Barents Sea–Lofoten and Norwegian Seamanagement plans focus on the conservation ofthreatened species and habitats, including Arcticspecies and habitats. Both the management plansand sectoral legislation that is important for theprotection of threatened marine species and habi-tats are discussed further in Chapter 6.4.1.

A number of the threatened species in the Arc-tic are migratory species or have populations thatare shared by more than one country. Interna-tional cooperation is essential for effective conser-vation of these species and their habitats. TheGovernment will strengthen cooperation underthe Bonn Convention and within the framework ofthe Arctic Council on the management of migra-tory species and populations that are sharedbetween several countries, focusing particularlyon threatened species. Special weight will begiven to cooperation on species that are depend-ent on the Arctic sea ice.

Norway has drawn up a national polar bearaction plan which focuses on closer monitoring ofthe population. The polar bear monitoring pro-gramme will be further developed on the basis ofthe plan. Cooperation between the five polar bearrange states – Canada, Greenland/Denmark, theUS, Russia and Norway – was strengthened withthe adoption of a circumpolar action plan at themeeting of the parties to the Agreement on theConservation of Polar Bears in September 2015.

More knowledge needs to be built up aboutthreatened species and habitats in the Norwegianpart of the Arctic, and more systematic evalua-tions need to be carried out. It is particularlyimportant to learn more about the implications ofclimate change for threatened species and habi-tats in the Arctic. The Government will furtherdevelop the knowledge base for the red lists ofthreatened species and habitat types in Svalbard,focusing on marine habitats and habitats associ-ated with sea ice.

Since climate change is a significant and grow-ing pressure on species and habitats in the polarregions, the Government’s efforts to combat cli-mate change will be especially important forthreatened species and habitats in the Arctic.

6.5 Genetic resources

Biodiversity exists at different levels. Geneticdiversity means variety at the level of genes andgenetic material, and in genetic make-up betweenindividuals of the same species. This diversity pro-vides the basis for evolutionary adaptation of spe-cies to different physical surroundings and cli-matic conditions. In-situ conservation of geneticdiversity is part of the overall effort to safeguardbiodiversity. The international framework for thiswork is set by the Convention on Biological Diver-sity and the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Bene-fit-sharing under the Convention, and the Interna-tional Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Foodand Agriculture. In Norway, the Norwegian Envi-ronment Agency is responsible for coordinatinginitiatives for in-situ conservation of genetic diver-sity.

Aichi target 13 under the Convention on Bio-logical Diversity is about maintaining the geneticdiversity of cultivated plants and farmed anddomesticated animals and their wild relatives.This genetic diversity includes valuable traits thatcan improve the adaptive capacity of agriculture toclimate change and give greater resistance to dis-eases.


The agricultural sector has a special responsi-bility for monitoring, conservation and sustainableuse of national genetic resources for food andagriculture. Norway is involved in internationalcooperation under FAO to achieve Aichi target 13,among other things through the adoption ofglobal plans of action for genetic resources forfood and agriculture. The Norwegian GeneticResource Centre, which is part of the NorwegianInstitute of Bioeconomy Research, is responsiblefor implementing and updating Norway’s nationalaction plans for the conservation and sustainableuse of genetic resources in farm animals, foresttrees and crops, including the wild relatives offood plants.

Ex-situ conservation of genetic resources forfood and agriculture takes place primarily insperm banks, seed banks, clone collections, muse-ums, arboreta and botanical gardens, while in-situconservation involves the active use of popula-tions of farm animals and crop plants, and the con-servation of genetic diversity in natural popula-tions of forest trees. The Government will con-tinue Norwegian participation in Nordic genebank cooperation through NordGen (the NordicGenetic Resource Center) under the NordicCouncil of Ministers and operation of the SvalbardGlobal Seed Vault as a repository for duplicates ofseed collections from the world’s gene banks. Inaddition, active cooperation with private- and pub-lic-sector actors will be used to maintain stands offorest trees, clone collections, sperm banks andseed banks of genetic resources for food and agri-culture.

Conservation strategies for traditional breedsof farm animals, crop varieties and forest trees arebased on the principle that genetic resources forfood and agriculture are best safeguarded byusing them in farming and forestry. Conservationefforts can make it possible to produce special-ised products and products with attractive quali-ties that can provide income for farms and localcommunities and thus ensure sustainableresource use. Grant schemes for environmentalmeasures in agriculture and forestry provideimportant support for these efforts. The Agricul-tural Agreement also includes grant schemes forfarm animal breeds of conservation value, and thescheme for native endangered cattle breeds willbe expanded to include endangered breeds ofsheep, goats and horses that are native to Norway.

In-situ conservation of forest trees and of wildrelatives of crop plants can be achieved by safe-

guarding specific habitats and areas where theygrow, for example by sustainable use and habitatmanagement. One advantage of in-situ conserva-tion is that plants can adapt to a changing climateand other changes in environmental conditions.Establishing protected areas and other measuresunder the Nature Diversity Act can make animportant contribution to this work. Other meas-ures may include habitat management for haymeadows and ensuring that the conservation ofgenetic resources is included in operational man-agement plans drawn up in accordance with sec-tion 47 of the Nature Diversity Act. It is importantthat both environmental and agricultural grantschemes are maintained, among other things tosafeguard threatened species and habitats.

The Norwegian Genetic Resource Centre iscurrently running a project on in-situ conserva-tion of crop wild relatives in protected areas inNorway. The project has identified more than 200species in the Norwegian flora that are either util-ity plants themselves or related to important foodor feed plants, and that should be maintained intheir natural habitats. In this way, their naturalgenetic diversity and traits that are speciallyadapted to the climate and growing conditions inNorway can be safeguarded and continue todevelop. In-situ conservation is also being usedfor forest genetic resources, and gene conserva-tion units for forest trees have been established in23 protected areas (nature reserves). Geneticresources that are important for commercial for-estry are maintained both in selected foreststands and in seed orchards. Seeds from impor-tant stands of forest trees are kept in NordGen’sseed collection and in the Svalbard Global SeedVault to provide information on changes in geneticcomposition over time. Chapters V and VII of theNature Diversity Act provide the legal frameworkfor this work. The environmental authorities areresponsible for following up the Act by developingfurther legislation and agreements on the collec-tion and use of genetic material obtained from thenatural environment.

We currently know too little about how geneticdiversity is being affected by factors such as habi-tat fragmentation and degradation or climatechange. The Government therefore considers itimportant to continue knowledge development,including through national mapping and monitor-ing programmes, and to develop good conserva-tion strategies, for example using action plans andmanagement plans.


7 Conservation of a representative selection of Norwegian nature

7.1 Introduction

Aichi target 11 is specifically about using area-based conservation measures for long-term con-servation. Norway’s corresponding national tar-get is that ‘a representative selection of Norwe-gian nature will be maintained for future genera-tions’. Promoting the conservation of ‘the fullrange of variation of habitats and landscape types’is specifically mentioned in section 33 of theNature Diversity Act in a list of the objectives ofestablishing protected areas. Others include theconservation of endangered natural environmentsand major intact ecosystems. Long-term conserva-tion measures can play a part in achieving severalof the Aichi targets at the same time. This is alsodiscussed in Chapter 6, where the protection ofareas under the Nature Diversity Act is mentionedas an appropriate way of safeguarding threatenedspecies and habitats. The Government will seek toachieve both national and international targets forlong-term conservation through a combination ofprotection of areas under the Nature Diversity Actand relevant sectoral measures. In this context,relevant measures are long-term in nature andgive effective protection against relevant pres-sures on geographically defined areas of biodiver-sity importance. Examples of sectoral measuresare the scheme for setting aside key biotopes inforest that are not to be felled, prohibiting the useof certain types of fishing gear under the MarineResources Act, and protecting river systems orparts of them against hydropower developments.If such measures are to fulfil their purpose, theareas involved must be managed in a way thatmaintains their conservation value in practice.

As is the case for measures to safeguardthreatened species and habitats, it is important totarget area-based conservation action so that spe-cies and habitats are given adequate protectionwithout restricting other activities that are benefi-cial to society more than necessary. The proce-dural rules and requirements for environmentalimpact assessment in legislation for various sec-

tors will ensure that the knowledge base is asgood as possible and that biodiversity considera-tions and other public interests are weighedagainst each other before decisions are made.According to section 8 of the Nature Diversity Act:‘Official decisions that affect biological, geologicaland landscape diversity shall, as far as is reasona-ble, be based on scientific knowledge of the popu-lation status of species, the range and ecologicalstatus of habitat types, and the impacts of environ-mental pressures. The knowledge required shallbe in reasonable proportion to the nature of thecase and the risk of damage to biological, geologi-cal and landscape diversity.’

7.2 Choice of long-term conservation measures

In Norway, the only long-term conservation meas-ure, apart from the designation of priority species,that gives protection against environmental pres-sures across sectors is statutory protection ofareas under the Nature Diversity Act (and previ-ously the Nature Conservation Act) or the Sval-bard Environmental Protection Act. Protectedareas are established by the King in Council. TheStorting (Norwegian parliament) has issuedguidelines for the implementation of protectionplans, for example in a 1992 white paper on thenational park plan and through the annual budgetproposals.

Sectoral measures include rules and schemesthat give areas some form of protection againstrelevant environmental pressures, usually protec-tion against a specific type of development oractivity. In the Government’s view, such measureswill often be sufficient if the development or activ-ity in question constitutes the main threat to thearea. However, they must provide effective, long-term protection against the development or activ-ity in delimited areas of particular conservationvalue. Some sectoral types of protection apply tomore than one type of development or activity. For


example, the Protection Plan for Watercourses(see Chapter 7.3.2 on rivers and lakes) gives pro-tection against both hydropower developmentsand other types of development. The Govern-ment’s proposals for the use of sector-specificmeasures are discussed below in the sections oneach major ecosystem.

Considerable areas of Norway already havestatutory protection. The Government thereforeconsiders that no large-scale expansion of thisform of conservation is needed. However, protec-tion of forest on a voluntary basis will beexpanded, and work on marine protected areaswill continue. In the other major ecosystems,there is a limited need to supplement protectedareas to include habitat types that are currentlypoorly represented (see more details in Chapter7.3). The Government will consider whether theprotected areas are likely to be resilient to futureclimate change. The Government will also evalu-ate whether the ecological network approach, asused for example in work under the Bern andRamsar Conventions, is clearly enough reflectedin Norway’s selection of protected areas and theirecological coherence. The Government concludes

that the current protected areas need to be sup-plemented, but only to a limited extent, to correctweaknesses in the system, and it will be resource-and cost-effective to organise this at county level.

As a general rule, the Government will makeuse of protection on a voluntary basis when estab-lishing protected areas on privately owned land.So far, this form of protection has only been usedfor forest.

Where appropriate, protection on a voluntarybasis should also be tried out in other ecosystemsthan forest. The Government also considers itimportant to seek political agreement at local levelon the implementation of protection processes.

Important areas that are publicly ownedshould be safeguarded by statutory protection,and steps will be taken to ensure that relevantstakeholders have satisfactory opportunities forparticipation in the protection processes.

The national park plan proposed the establish-ment of 40 new protected areas and the expansionof 14 existing areas. All but four of the proposalshave been implemented. Two of the proposalsthat have not been implemented are in Finnmarkcounty (to establish Muvrrešáhpi national park

Figure 7.1 Bog asphodel in flower in Rago national park in Nordland. Norway has safeguarded a repre-sentative selection of its dramatic mountain scenery by implementing the national park plan.

Photo: Kjersti Gram Andersen


and Goahteluoppal protected landscape, andexpand Øvre Anarjohka national park), one is inNordland (Tysfjord/Hellemobotn national park)and the fourth is in Troms (Treriksrøysa nationalpark). There has been a great deal of local opposi-tion to these proposals, especially in Finnmarkand Nordland. The Government does not wish toproceed with these proposals unless politicalagreement on the establishment of the protectedareas can be achieved locally, in the municipalitiesthat would be affected. The proposed Treriks-røysa national park was intended to form part of acontinuous protected area in Norway, Sweden andFinland, but this has not so far been a priority forSweden or Finland. In the Government’s view, it isnot appropriate to proceed with this proposaleither, unless the municipality itself wishes to doso and trilateral cooperation on the process can beorganised.

In some cases, individuals, organisations ormunicipalities propose the establishment ofnational parks under the Nature Diversity Act.The Government considers such initiatives to bevery constructive. However, if the Government isto proceed with such proposals, there must bepolitical consensus on this in the municipalitiesinvolved, they must meet the scientific criteria forestablishing protected areas, and protecting anysuch area must be consistent with the budgetarypriorities for protection of areas.

Both individuals and a range of public inter-ests are affected by the establishment of protectedareas. Good, inclusive administrative proceduresare of crucial importance in ensuring that stake-holders, including landowners, municipalities,interest groups and sectoral authorities, feel thatprotection decisions are legitimate. Sections 41 to43 of the Nature Diversity Act describe the proce-dures to be followed, and these were further elab-orated in 2015 in a circular from the Ministry ofClimate and Environment. During the administra-tive process, the conservation value of the areathat is to be protected must be clearly identified,together with the other interests that must betaken into consideration.

A sense of local ownership and identity, theprinciple that decisions should be taken at thelowest possible administrative level, and a combi-nation of local knowledge and scientific knowl-edge are a good basis for sound management ofprotected areas. Administrative authority for thenational parks and other large protected areas inmainland Norway has been delegated to manage-ment bodies consisting of politicians from themunicipalities and counties involved, and repre-

sentatives appointed by the Sámediggi (Sami par-liament) in areas where there are Sami interests.Landowners and other stakeholders can take partin the management of these areas through mem-bership in advisory committees appointed by themanagement bodies. Administrative authority forthe smaller protected areas, mainly naturereserves, smaller protected landscapes and habi-tat management areas, is delegated to the relevantmunicipalities if they wish to assume this respon-sibility. In Svalbard, the Governor is responsiblefor inspection and enforcement in the protectedareas and for taking any steps considered neces-sary to achieve the purpose of the protection. TheGovernor is also responsible for drawing up man-agement plans through processes involving theparticipation of local stakeholders and the Long-yearbyen Local Administration. Managementplans are approved by the Norwegian Environ-ment Agency in consultation with the Directoratefor Cultural Heritage.

Norway’s protected areas support valuablebiodiversity, and with a long-term managementapproach that is line with the purpose of protec-tion, they can provide an important basis for local,nature-based value creation. The national parksand large protected landscapes in particular pro-vide a basis for the development of nature-basedtourism. Local management of these areas makesit possible for a municipality to coordinate themanagement of protected areas with land-usemanagement in the rest of the municipality, and tofacilitate nature-based tourism in and around theprotected areas.

The ecological status of protected areas mustbe maintained or improved to comply with thepurpose of the protection decisions. Until now,routines for monitoring whether the ecologicalstatus of protected areas is being maintained (orimproved in line with the purpose of protection)have not always been adequate. A system is there-fore being developed for monitoring and report-ing on specified ecological or landscape qualitiesof protected areas and trends in these qualities.This system will be a sound basis for effective andappropriate management of protected areas.

The Government will give priority to soundmanagement of the existing protected areas.There are requirements to draw up operationaland in some cases strategic management plans formany of the protected areas. These will specifywhat needs to be done to maintain conservationvalue, make arrangements for access and use, etc.This will provide predictability for all stakehold-ers. The Government would like to emphasise


that all management plans must comply with theframework set by the regulations establishing theprotected area in question and the provisions ofthe Nature Diversity Act. The Government con-siders it important that management plans takethe implications of climate change for efforts tomaintain the conservation value of protectedareas properly into account. This is particularlyimportant in Svalbard, where the climate is chang-ing very rapidly. In mainland Norway, the Norwe-gian Nature Inspectorate plays an important rolein maintaining the conservation value of protectedareas, both through its inspection and enforce-ment activities and through its other functions –habitat management, providing advice and infor-mation, facilitating public access and monitoringecological status.

Private conservation agreements can also playan important part in safeguarding Norwegiannature. However, they may not provide long-termprotection, and can only give protection againstpressures and impacts that the private landownercan influence.

To safeguard a representative selection of Norwegian nature for future generations, the Government will:

• Improve the management regime for existingprotected areas, among other things by making itmore ef ficient and more clearly targeted, in orderto maintain the conservation value of protectedareas and ensure that they become more resilientto climate change and more intensive use.

• Protect habitats and ecosystems that are cur-rently underrepresented under the Nature Diver-sity Act.

• Consider adjustments to the boundaries of prote-cted areas and if appropriate the expansion ofprotected areas to improve ecological networksand resilience to climate change.

• Test protection on a voluntary basis in ecosys-tems other than forest.

• Make use of and if necessary further developother area-based conservation measures so thatthey provide ef fective, long-term protectionagainst relevant environmental pressures.

7.3 Protection of areas in each of Norway’s major ecosystems


Marine protected areas may be established inNorway’s territorial waters, extending up to 12nautical miles beyond the baseline. The Govern-

ment’s policy is to continue cross-sectoral marineprotection under section 39 of the Nature Diver-sity Act to ensure that a selection of representa-tive, distinctive and threatened underwater habi-tats along the coast and in territorial waters issafeguarded for future generations. The objectiveis for these areas, together with areas that aresafeguarded under other legislation, to form a net-work of marine protected areas that will safeguardecosystems, habitats and species.

Marine areas may also be included when pro-tected areas on land, such as national parks andnature reserves, are established. Within suchareas, all activity that may reduce conservationvalue is regulated in accordance with the purposeof the protection. Activities that are not contraryto the purpose of protection will still be permitted.Marine protected areas can serve several pur-poses at once. In addition to protecting areas thatare of importance for biodiversity against environ-mental pressures, they can be important refer-ence areas for research and monitoring.

In addition to the areas that have been givencross-sectoral protection, there are many areasthat are protected against various types of fishingactivities under the fisheries legislation. Forexample, a number of areas are protected againstthe use of fishing gear and techniques that candamage coral reefs, see Chapter 6.5. The Ministryof Trade, Industry and Fisheries will in consulta-tion with the Ministry of Climate and Environ-ment review whether these measures are suffi-cient to protect a representative selection of habi-tats against relevant fisheries activities. The twoministries will among other things consider safe-guarding a more representative selection of coralhabitats either under section 66 of the Regulationsrelating to sea-water fisheries or under section 19of the Marine Resources Act. The ministries willalso assess the ecological coherence of marineprotected areas.


About 15 % of Norway’s total area of freshwater isnow protected or proposed for protection underthe Nature Diversity Act. Nevertheless, a numberof habitats are poorly represented in protectedareas. These include oxbow lakes and other fea-tures of meandering rivers, large sand and gravelbanks, the spray zone near waterfalls (especiallyoutside Eastern Norway) and lakes and pondsthat are naturally free of fish. Most of these arehabitats for a range of threatened species. TheGovernment will therefore consider some supple-


mentary protection of areas in rivers and lakes.Protection processes that make the selection ofprotected areas more representative and that atthe same time safeguard threatened species willbe given priority. The Government will also givepriority to statutory protection of valuable areasthat are already protected against hydropowerdevelopments through the Protection Plan forWatercourses. The Government will consideroptions for protection of lakes and rivers on a vol-untary basis.

Through the Protection Plan for Water-courses, 389 river systems or parts of river sys-tems are protected against hydropower develop-ments. They include a wide variety of river sys-tems and types of rivers, and the plan plays animportant part in the conservation of a represent-ative selection of Norway’s rivers and lakes. Theconservation value of these rivers must also betaken into account in development projects inother sectors. This is required by the WaterResources Act and Norway’s national policyguidelines for protected river systems. Neverthe-less, some developments do take place in pro-tected river systems that reduce their conserva-tion value. The Government will seek to ensurethat the conservation value of protected river sys-tems is maintained, or restored if developmentshave had negative impacts that prove to havereduced their conservation value. The conserva-tion value of protected river systems is to be safe-guarded through application of existing legisla-tion, especially the Planning and Building Act andthe Water Resources Act. The Government willalso assess whether parts of the protected riversystems need to be further safeguarded by pro-tecting areas under the Nature Diversity Act.

7.3.3 Wetlands

County conservation plans for wetlands haveresulted in the establishment of more than 600nature reserves. Overall, a good proportion of thearea of peatland has been protected, particularlyin the mountains, but the areas included are notvery representative in geographical terms, par-ticularly in the southern parts of the country andalong the coast. Wetlands other than peatland inthe southern half of Norway are underrepre-sented. The Government will consider supple-menting protected wetland areas, particularly inthe lowlands and coastal areas. Areas adjoiningexisting Ramsar sites will be given priority. TheGovernment will consider the county wetland con-servation plan for Finnmark as part of the county-

level supplementary protection of areas. The Gov-ernment notes that wetlands have particularlyimportant climate-related functions. Peatlands area major carbon sink. Open alluvial systems, inlanddeltas and peatlands regulate water flow and pro-vide protection against erosion and natural haz-ards. They can therefore play a part in climatechange adaptation and help to reduce damage tovital infrastructure. The Government will attachimportance to this when considering supplemen-tary protection of areas under the Nature Diver-sity Act.

7.3.4 Forest

The Government will continue its long-term forestconservation work, mainly in the form of protec-tion under the Nature Diversity Act for publiclyowned forest and protection on a voluntary basisfor privately owned areas, in both cases followingthe provisions of the Nature Diversity Act con-cerning compensation. Through cooperationbetween the environmental authorities and theforest owners’ organisations, the Government willestablish good procedures for rapid evaluation offorest areas of high conservation value for protec-tion on a voluntary basis if their value is threat-ened by the construction of forest roads, loggingor other forestry activities. Examples of suchareas are forest where a high proportion of thearea is set aside as key biotopes that are not to befelled, and large continuous forest areas contain-ing species and habitats found in areas with littleinfrastructure development.

Relatively little of the large forest areas in low-lying parts of Eastern Norway has been pro-tected. It will be important to establish new naturereserves in this region, including larger protectedareas, and it will also be necessary to protect for-est where important environmental qualities canbe developed in the long term.

Various measures can be used in forest as away of achieving Aichi target 11 on area-based,long-term conservation. Conservation measuresunder other legislation and in other sectors can beused for this purpose in addition to the establish-ment of nature reserves and national parks in for-est under the Nature Diversity Act, which pro-vides protection against a number of environmen-tal pressures. However, other area-based conser-vation measures must provide effective, long-termprotection of areas that support valuable biodiver-sity.

Key biotopes in forest are delimited areas thatare considered to be important for the conserva-


tion of biodiversity. Requirements to carry outinventories of key biotopes and safeguard themare included in the voluntary forest certificationschemes used in Norway, PEFC and FSC, and inthe forestry legislation. For example, section 5 ofthe regulations on sustainable forestry requiresforest owners to ensure that the value of impor-tant habitats and key biotopes is safeguarded inaccordance with the guidelines in the NorwegianPEFC standard. By 2015, about 70 000 areas cov-ering a total area of about 750 square kilometreshad been identified as key biotopes through envi-ronmental inventories. This corresponds toalmost 1 % of the total area of productive forest.Since environmental inventories have not yet beencarried out for all forest properties, the proportionof productive forest set aside as key biotopes isexpected to increase.

There are certain habitats, such as recentlyburned areas and successional stages of broad-leaved forest, that are naturally important forthreatened species for a limited period of timeonly. To maintain the diversity of such habitatsand the species associated with them, new locali-ties will need to be established regularly. The vol-untary certification schemes include guidelinesfor changing and replacing key biotopes, withrequirements for documentation. Experience sofar indicates that in general, a long-term approachis being taken to conservation of key biotopes andtheir value for biodiversity.

In the Government’s view, key biotopes in for-est should count towards Norway’s achievementof Aichi target 11 on representative, long-termconservation in forest ecosystems. As a basis forNorway’s future reporting on progress towardsthis target, the Ministry of Climate and Environ-ment will in consultation with the Ministry of Agri-culture and Food, and after dialogue with PEFCon technical matters such as data quality, clarifythe criteria for and the scope of key biotopes thatcan be included in these reports.

Forest conservation is long-term work andmust therefore be continued after 2020. The Gov-ernment will expand the scope of voluntary forestprotection. An evaluation of forest conservationwill be carried out with a view to identifying meas-ures that can contribute to the conservation of arepresentative selection of Norwegian forest eco-systems and valuable biodiversity.

The Government’s aim is to ensure that area-based forest conservation incorporates the areasthat are most important for critically endangeredspecies and habitats, in addition to a representa-tive selection of forest ecosystems, see Chapter 6

on threatened species and habitats. This requiresa good overview of where the forest areas of high-est conservation value are to be found. As a basisfor effective forest conservation, the Governmenttherefore intends to initiate habitat mapping of allold-growth forest that may be of conservationvalue. Habitat mapping in regions and forest typesthat are underrepresented at present will be givenpriority in the years ahead.


Only a relatively small proportion of most of thehabitat types in cultural landscapes that are impor-tant for biodiversity has statutory protection. Inaddition, conservation of a representative selec-tion of cultural landscapes requires their activeuse or management. To ensure the conservationof a more representative selection of cultural land-scapes, the Government will consider protectionof some areas under the Nature Diversity Act,combined with measures such as habitat manage-ment for certain sites where there are rare habitattypes or that are of very high quality. Further-more, the Government will improve the manage-ment of semi-natural habitats within existing pro-tected landscapes in order to maintain their con-servation value. The Government will considerthe use of voluntary agreements on the use andconservation of valuable cultural landscapes as asupplement, but emphasises that such agree-ments can only be applied to the way landownersuse the areas involved, and that they do notensure long-term conservation in the event ofchanges in ownership.

7.3.6 Mountains

About 35 % of the area of Norway above 900metres above sea level is protected under theNature Diversity Act, and roughly 75 % of the totalarea of Norway’s national parks is in the moun-tains. This is the result of the implementation ofthe 1992 national park plan. The proposals in thenational park plan have been implemented, withthe exception of a few areas in the northernmostcounties, mainly Finnmark (see Chapter 7.2). ForNorway as a whole, a representative selection ofmountain ecosystems has now been protected. Inthe Government’s view, there is therefore no needto expand the area of mountain ecosystems inorder to make the selection more representative(but see Chapter 6 for a discussion of the conser-vation of threatened species and ecosystems).The Government will seek to ensure that the con-


servation value of existing protected areas in themountains is maintained or if necessary restored.The preparation of management plans is an impor-tant tool in this context.


Protected areas in Svalbard and Jan Mayen covermost of the land areas and territorial waters of theislands. In Svalbard, the protected areas were sup-plemented and expanded in the period 2002–2006, on the basis of a geographical analysis of theprotected areas and their representativeness. TheGovernment considers that the major ecosystemsin Svalbard and on Jan Mayen are all adequately

represented. However, the knowledge base is notgood enough for us to determine whether the pro-tected areas are ecologically representative of allSvalbard’s nature. The main task now is to ensurethat the protected areas in Svalbard and JanMayen are managed in accordance with the pur-pose of protection, so that all habitats are properlysafeguarded. The Government considers the man-agement plans for the protected area to be themost important tool in this context. The Govern-ment’s proposals for long-term conservationmeasures under the fisheries managementregime are discussed in the sections on marineand coastal waters.


8 Improving knowledge on biodiversity

8.1 Why is knowledge so important?

Norway’s policy is that biodiversity managementmust be knowledge-based. This was one of thekey elements of the 2001 white paper on Norway’sbiodiversity policy (Report No. 42 to the Storting(2000–2001)), and is one of the principles onwhich the Nature Diversity Act is based (section8). Moreover, Article 112 of the Norwegian Con-stitution gives every person a right to a healthyenvironment whose productivity and diversity aremaintained and to information to enable them tosafeguard this right. A sound knowledge base isessential to fulfil these rights. The EnvironmentalInformation Act (Act of 9 May 2003 No. 31 relatingto the right to environmental information and pub-lic participation in decision-making processesrelating to the environment) requires both publicauthorities and undertakings to hold environmen-tal information. The authorities are also requiredto make environmental information accessible tothe public, and both authorities and undertakingsmust disclose the environmental information theyhold to anyone who asks for it, unless the Act spe-cifically provides for the information to beexempted from public disclosure. A sound knowl-edge base is vital for good management and forchoosing the right measures to achieve nationalbiodiversity targets. Aichi target 19 states that ‘By2020, knowledge, the science base and technolo-gies relating to biodiversity, its values, function-ing, status and trends, and the consequences of itsloss, are improved, widely shared and transferred,and applied.’ Internationally, high priority is beinggiven to strengthening the science-policy inter-face, and to ensuring that information is widelyshared and applied.

The public administration needs knowledgeand information of various kinds. This includesspatial data on the natural environment obtainedby mapping and remote sensing, and monitoringdata to provide information about trends in eco-logical status and the causes of change. Informa-tion about species (taxonomy), their relationships(systematics) and their ecology is also needed.Knowledge about ecological interactions is vital

for the public administration and for sound man-agement, and this and other ecological knowledgeis built up through research. In addition toresearch results, various types of syntheses, riskassessments, scenarios and cross-disciplinaryassessments are compiled, and provide valuableinformation as a basis for management.

Major social and economic change is currentlytaking place and putting pressure on biodiversity.Knowledge in the field of social sciences, includ-ing economics, is therefore vital in addition to sci-entific knowledge.

A shared, robust knowledge base makes it eas-ier to agree on decisions and ensures that deci-sion-making processes are more effective. Varioustypes of knowledge and information are discussedfurther in the rest of this chapter.

In order to make good decisions that will safe-guard the environment, it is essential that a soundinterdisciplinary knowledge base is available fordecision makers and the general public, and thatthis knowledge is applied. The environmentalauthorities have a responsibility for making surethat the necessary knowledge is available, andthat priorities for new knowledge building arebased on interdisciplinary analyses of whereknowledge needs are greatest.

8.2 Mapping biodiversity and establishing maps of ecological information for Norway

Land conversion and land-use change resulting inhabitat degradation and fragmentation is the mostserious threat to biodiversity today. It is essentialto have spatial data on species, habitats and land-scapes so that biodiversity can be taken properlyinto account in planning and decision making.Spatial data can be obtained by conventional map-ping of biodiversity and by remote sensing. Anumber of geographical information systems(GIS) are available that can capture such data.

Good, up-to-date ecological data is vital forsound planning and for finding good, integratedsolutions for projects and developments of all


sizes. If information is available at an early stage,it is much easier to take valuable biodiversity intoaccount. A sound knowledge base can thereforereduce conflict. Decision-making processes willalso become more predictable and effective, sincethere is less need for the time-consuming processof obtaining supplementary information. This willbenefit projects in sectors including transport andenergy.

In recent years, Norway has been giving prior-ity to building up knowledge about the distribu-tion of species and habitats, but there are stillmajor knowledge gaps to be filled. In February2015, the Storting (Norwegian parliament)debated a proposal on measures for knowledge-based management of Norwegian nature. TheStanding Committee on Energy and the Environ-ment pointed to the need to learn more about spe-cies, habitats and ecosystems. A majority of thecommittee agreed that they expected the presentwhite paper to describe more specifically howNorwegian nature and biodiversity is to bemapped.

The Norwegian Environment Agency is start-ing to use a new system for classifying and map-ping habitats, ecosystems and landscapes in Nor-way, and has in cooperation with the NorwegianBiodiversity Information Centre begun drawingup the necessary guidance documents and techni-cal infrastructure. The Government will continuethe work of mapping nature and biodiversity andnature in Norway, in accordance with the recom-mendation from the Standing Committee onEnergy and the Environment.

Through this process, georeferenced ecologi-cal data will be obtained and will be used to createa collection of map layers showing ecological data,including where in Norway species and habitatsare found. There will be other map layers for spe-cific environmental variables, which will provideinformation on where in Norway conditions aresuitable for particular habitats or species. Someecological spatial data are already available fromvarious databases. Examples include data on bio-diversity in protected areas, data in the Naturbaseportal (habitat types, species, protected areas andareas set aside for outdoor recreation), speciesdata from the Species Map Service run by theNorwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, anddata on land resources. Specific legislative instru-ments apply to some categories of mapped areas.Relevant types of ecological information includebedrock, soil water content, seawater salinity andtopography.

The Naturbase portal run by the NorwegianEnvironment Agency is currently an importantsource of spatial data on habitats, and the SpeciesMap Service run by the Norwegian BiodiversityInformation Centre provides spatial data on spe-cies. Quality assurance is being carried out for thedata already uploaded to Naturbase. In future, theBiodiversity Information Centre will play animportant part in supplying and coordinating spa-tial data on habitats, ecosystems and landscapesclassified using the new Norwegian system. Geo-graphical areas for which the data is currentlyincomplete will be given priority in the Govern-ment’s initiative for nature and biodiversity map-ping.

Map layers for ecological data are currentlyavailable through various institutions in publiclyavailable national datasets. Some of these aremodelled, while others are based on field surveys.Some map layers can be used directly as nation-wide datasets showing environmental variation.Others will need to be further developed orupdated before they can be used in this way. TheGovernment will ensure that over time, a goodbasis for the analysis and modelling of Norwegiannature is built up through cooperation and thedevelopment of such datasets. If maps of theentire country showing ecological gradients areavailable, this will save time and money, for exam-ple by making it possible to decide on more pre-cise priorities for further mapping of Norwegiannature.

The Government considers it necessary tocontinue mapping of species, habitats and ecosys-tems, landscapes and ecosystem services in Nor-way. In the context of land-use management, map-ping to obtain biodiversity data that is needed inday-to-day decisions on land use and other issuesthat influence environmental pressures is particu-larly important. On this basis, the Governmentwill give highest priority to mapping of habitatsthat are threatened, important for many differentspecies, provide key ecosystem services, or areparticularly poorly mapped. Priority will also begiven to geographical areas where mapping willprovide most benefits for society, including areasboth on land and at sea where the level of humanactivity is high and that are under great pressure,and areas where climate change is expected toresult in rapid change. The new Norwegian sys-tem for classifying habitats, ecosystems and land-scapes is to be used as the basis for public-sectormapping of Norwegian nature, in accordance withthe Storting’s decision. As part of this work, theGovernment will assess the need to supplement


the classification of marine habitats and ecosys-tems to provide more complete coverage of therange of Arctic marine habitats and ecosystems,including those in icy waters.

A larger-scale initiative to map nature and bio-diversity in Norway will require adequate infra-structure, and cooperation between a number ofkey bodies involved in the production of relevantmap layers will have to be organised and coordi-nated. These bodies include the Geological Sur-vey of Norway, the Norwegian Mapping Authorityand the Norwegian Meteorological Institute. TheNorwegian Biodiversity Information Centre hasdeveloped expertise in this type of coordinationthrough its work on red lists and geographicalspecies information, and the development of thenew Norwegian system for classifying habitats,ecosystems and landscapes.


• Continue ongoing mapping programmes fornature and biodiversity in Norway up to 2020.

• Continue the MAREANO programme for map-ping of the seabed in Norwegian waters.

• Integrate existing data on key environmentalvariables from various sectors with spatial dataon nature and biodiversity in Norway.

• Further develop and improve databases contai-ning spatial data on biodiversity.

• Continue the work of identifying and mappingparticularly valuable and vulnerable marineareas and mapping of old-growth forest of conser-vation interest.

8.3 Monitoring

The natural environment changes constantly, insome cases as a consequence of human activity.We need to understand environmental trends overtime and the causes of change. This knowledgecan be acquired through monitoring data obtainedby field observations or from satellite data, andthrough research based on monitoring data. Mon-itoring programmes provide long time series ofdata. They generally need to be followed up byresearch to build up knowledge about ecologicalrelationships and the causes of change. Buildingup knowledge about ecological status and trendsin ecosystems requires monitoring programmesfor a representative selection of key indicators fordifferent ecosystems, in addition to data from ref-erence areas. Developing an understanding ofenvironmental pressures and relationships

between pressures and ecological status requiresmonitoring of important pressures such as landconversion and land-use change in addition.

A number of monitoring programmes havealready been established and are providing infor-mation on trends in Norwegian ecosystems. Someare run by the environmental authorities andsome by other sectors. Biodiversity is now beingmonitored to some extent in all Norway’s majorecosystems.

However, the current monitoring system isstill inadequate for a number of environmentalpressures and species groups, certain ecosystemsare less well covered, and the system does notprovide sufficiently representative or completegeographical coverage. In the Government’s view,the Norwegian environmental monitoring systemshould be reviewed to identify any changesneeded to obtain a sound knowledge base andcomplete geographical coverage. It is important tohave an overview of trends for those speciesgroups (particularly key species) and habitats weknow little about at present, or that are expectedto be under growing pressure in future. Moreknowledge is also needed about environmentalpressures and impacts. A better knowledge base,including knowledge about the impacts of varioustypes of projects and measures, will make it possi-ble to assess changes in biodiversity more accu-rately. It is vital to be able to do this so that actionto safeguard biodiversity can be more clearly tar-geted and developments that affect valuable andthreatened species and habitats can be avoided.Monitoring programmes for coastal waters, cul-tural landscapes and wetlands are particularlyincomplete. There are also substantial gaps in theknowledge base for water resource managementunder the Water Management Regulations,despite improvements in recent years. Norway isat the forefront of developments internationally asregards marine monitoring. The Institute ofMarine Research runs extensive long-term moni-toring programmes for Norwegian sea areas. Anumber of time series have been running formany decades. Despite this, monitoring of marinebiodiversity does not fully cover the ecologicalinteractions and complexity of marine ecosys-tems.

In the Government’s view, it is also importantto monitor environmental pressures, includingland-use change and climate change. New model-based tools for land-use management are neededto make it possible to model the cumulativeeffects of all proposed projects and developments,and to include the projected responses of ecosys-


tems to climate change. This is of crucial impor-tance for assessing the impacts of different pres-sures on the environment and the cumulativeeffects in specific areas. Surveillance monitoringof ecological status in coastal waters needs to beimproved. Long time series are needed to under-stand the causes of change in ecosystems. Moni-toring programmes are needed as a basis for iden-tifying appropriate measures for achieving the tar-get of good ecological status, including meetingthe requirements of the Water Management Regu-lations. They are also needed to gather sufficientdata to make use of the Nature Index for marineand coastal waters.

New satellite-based technology is making itpossible to improve environmental monitoringand make it more effective. The Copernicus pro-gramme is the EU Earth observation and monitor-ing programme, and includes resource manage-ment, environmental and climate monitoring andemergency management and security. The Gov-ernment will continue Norway’s active role in theCopernicus programme, and will assess when andhow the environmental authorities can benefit byusing satellite data from the programme. Monitor-ing of biodiversity and of the impacts of land-usechange and climate change will be of particularinterest in cases where the satellite data providesufficient management-relevant information. Thequality of satellite data is improving and access tothe data is becoming easier, providing a betterbasis for developing new management tools basedon models used in landscape ecology. These canmake it possible to model and analyse the effectsof land conversion and habitat fragmentation, andbarrier effects resulting from existing andplanned developments. They will also make it pos-sible to take into account the projected responsesof biodiversity to climate change in planning pro-cesses. These tools and models will also be usefulin planning transport and energy infrastructureprojects and smaller-scale projects, and will pro-vide a better basis for assessing the cumulativeeffects of developments across sectors.


• Ensure that monitoring programmes for ecologi-cal status in all Norway’s major ecosystems areecologically and geographically representative.This will include steps to strengthen monitoringof ecological status in freshwater and coastalwater bodies.

• Ensure that there is public access to all monitor-ing data collected by all types of research instituti-

ons using public funding, with the exception ofsensitive data.

• Assess how satellite data can be more widely usedin planning processes and in monitoring changesin biodiversity and in land use nationally andinternationally.

• Further develop indicators of land use and otherenvironmental pressure indicators, includingidentifying suitable indicators for ocean acidifi-cation and climate change.

• Consider the development of analytical tools forplanning processes, for analysing status, trendsand the causes of trends, and for analysing thecumulative ef fects of dif ferent types of develop-ments and pressures in an area.

• Continue and further develop the mapping andmonitoring programme for seabirds.

• Develop methods and tools for monitoring cli-mate-related changes in biodiversity.

• Develop indicators for ecosystem services.

8.4 Research and development and education

The environmental authorities need knowledgederived from research to understand ecologicalinteractions, ecological functions, causal relation-ships and the effects of different policy instru-ments. In addition, research based on monitoringdata is needed to build up this kind of knowledge.Despite considerable progress in recent years,there are still gaps in our knowledge of biodiver-sity and ecosystems. This is a very complex field,covering everything from genetic variation at pop-ulation level to the dynamics of ecosystems. Agreat deal of research has been devoted to estab-lishing explanatory models for observed changesin individual populations. More recently, growingattention has been focused on higher-level ecosys-tem interactions, greatly helped by the develop-ment of more advanced analytical tools and thegrowth in computer capacity. At the same time,our knowledge needs have become more com-plex. Research on resources, pressures and envi-ronmental change is needed to develop knowl-edge-based solutions for social and industrialdevelopment. This means that research needs tobe better integrated and more interdisciplinary,with closer links between research in the naturalsciences, social sciences and humaniora.

There are major unmet research needs relat-ing to biodiversity and ecosystem services. Bothresearch and monitoring initiatives are needed tostrengthen the knowledge base on the most


important pressures affecting biodiversity andecosystem services, including land-use conver-sion and land-use change, climate change andocean acidification. Some research on biodiversityand climate change is included in Norway’s large-scale programme on climate research, KLIMA-FORSK. However, there is a clear need forresearch focusing specifically on questions relat-ing to the loss of biodiversity, and for strongerintegration of research on biodiversity, climatechange and other environmental issues. Researchon land-use change must have a place in newresearch programmes that will continue environ-mental and marine research.

The Government expects the new MILJØ-FORSK programme (Programme for Environ-mental Research for a Green Transition) to fundresearch that will help to meet the knowledgeneeds relating to biodiversity discussed earlier inthis chapter. In the Government’s view, there isalso a need for the Research Council of Norwayand the ministries that fund research tostrengthen their cooperation and scale up co-fund-ing across sectors. A good framework should alsobe provided for stronger cooperation betweenenvironmental and industry-oriented researchprogrammes.

Internationalisation, and European researchcooperation in particular, has helped to improveresearch results. Horizon 2020 is the world’s larg-est research and innovation programme, withfunding of EUR 80 billion available over a seven-year period (2014–2020). Research groups, thepublic sector and companies in Norway can takepart in the same way as colleagues and competi-tors in other European countries. Research andfunding are being divided between three pro-gramme sections: excellent science, industrialleadership and societal challenges. Seven keysocietal challenges have been identified. Theseare health, demographic change and wellbeing;food security, sustainable agriculture and forestry,marine and maritime and inland water research,and the bioeconomy; secure, clean and efficientenergy; smart, green and integrated transport; cli-mate action, environment, resource efficiency andraw materials; Europe in a changing world – inclu-sive, innovative and reflective societies; andsecure societies – protecting freedom and securityof Europe and its citizens. In June 2014, the Gov-ernment presented a strategy for research andinnovation cooperation with the EU. One of itsgoals is greater Norwegian participation in Hori-zon 2020.

International knowledge generation pro-cesses such as the work being carried out by theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) have been very important for Norwegianclimate research. The Government values thiswork and also wishes Norway to play an impor-tant role in the recently established Intergovern-mental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversityand Ecosystem Services (IPBES), which is mod-elled on the IPCC. Its work focuses on the impor-tance of biodiversity and ecosystem services forhuman well-being. It takes an interdisciplinaryapproach and will in the next few years generateknowledge and make recommendations in areassuch as pollination and food production, invasivealien species, policy support tools such as sce-nario analysis, valuation methodologies and globalassessments of status and trends. The IPBES hasa Technical Support Unit on Capacity Building inTrondheim in Norway, which is to assist with thecapacity building part of the work programme.The unit is located in the premises of the Norwe-gian Environment Agency, which is also Norway’snational focal point for the IPBES. The Govern-ment will continue Norway’s involvement in thework of the IPBES and will encourage Norwegianexperts to play an active part in this internationalcooperation and in formulating mandates, meth-odology and tools for its work.

The establishment of Norwegian researchcentres such as the Fram Centre in Tromsø, theBjerknes Centre for Climate Research in Bergenand the Oslo Centre for Interdisciplinary Environ-mental and Social Research (CIENS) strengthensresearch groups and promotes broader-basedinterdisciplinary cooperation. However, in thefield of the conservation and use of biodiversityand ecosystem services, there has been no centreresponsible for cross-disciplinary appliedresearch and for communicating results. Giventhe requirements for knowledge-based manage-ment that follow from the Nature Diversity Act,implementation of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity, the establishment of IPBES and thegrowing priority being given to ecosystem ser-vices (for example in Official Norwegian ReportNOU 2013:10 on the value of ecosystem services),the Research Council of Norway has supported areview of the case for establishing such a centreby the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research,NTNU (the Norwegian University of Science andTechnology) and the Norwegian BiodiversityInformation Centre. As a follow up to the review,the Centre for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Ser-vices (CeBES) has now been established through


formalised cooperation between NTNU, the Nor-wegian Institute for Nature Research, the Norwe-gian Institute of Bioeconomy Research (NIBIO)and SINTEF. The aim is for the Centre to becomea national hub for innovative, interdisciplinaryresearch and development and dissemination, andthus contribute to national and global efforts forbiodiversity conservation and sustainable devel-opment. The Research Council is also supportingthe scheme for Centres of Excellence in research.

Species and habitats have lost ground as aresearch field and study area at Norwegian uni-versities and colleges in recent years. The Stort-ing has also called attention to this. The Ministryof Education and Research (via funding for theResearch Council of Norway) and the Ministry ofClimate and Environment (via funding for theNorwegian Taxonomy Initiative run by the Nor-wegian Biodiversity Information Centre) havetogether strengthened researcher recruitment tothe field by providing strategic funding for thenational Research School in Biosystematics. Theschool was established with co-funding from theResearch Council, and is a good platform for coop-

eration with other Nordic countries. The researchschool cooperates with similar initiatives at Nor-dic and European level, and is administered by theNatural History Museum at the University ofOslo. The Government considers it to be veryimportant that research groups at universities andcolleges are large enough to ensure that expertisein such basic fields is not lost. The Governmentwill continue to support the Research School inBiosystematics.

The foundation for future expertise in andresearch on biodiversity and the environment islaid during primary and secondary education.Curricula, teachers’ qualifications and the contentof teaching plans all play a vital part in givingpupils an insight into and understanding of theworld’s major environmental problems. Knowl-edge about biodiversity, important drivers of bio-diversity loss and possible solutions to the prob-lems must all be included in the teaching pro-grammes. It is also important that these subjectsare taught in a way that encourages the recruit-ment of students and researchers, both to the sub-ject itself and to more interdisciplinary research

Figure 8.1 The national park centres play an important role in communicating information about nature and the outdoors. Here a school class is learning about Norway’s national parks.

Photo: Norwegian Mountain Museum/Visitors’ Centre for Jotunheimen, Reinheimen and Breheimen National Parks


into complex environmental problems and solu-tions. The Sustainable Backpack programme willbe continued. This is a nationwide initiative by theMinistry of Education and Research and the Min-istry of Climate and Environment to support Nor-wegian schools in implementing Education forSustainable Development (ESD). From the schoolyear 2016/2017, the Government is introducingone extra lesson a week in the natural sciences,which schools may teach in year 5, 6 or 7. Thiswill mean that pupils receive an extra 40 hours’teaching in the natural sciences.

The Government’s long-term plan for researchand higher education emphasises the need formore knowledge about the most serious environ-mental threats, including the loss of biodiversity.It also identifies the need to learn more aboutinteractions between climate change and otherenvironmental pressures and how different envi-ronmental and climate-related measures can sup-port each other. The Government will addressthese knowledge needs as part of the work ofimplementing the long-term plan.

The EU has developed a common assessmentframework for mapping ecosystems and their ser-vices in the EU countries (see Figure 8.1). Thisinvolves assessing ecosystem condition on thebasis of data from mapping, monitoring and data-bases and using relevant indicators, and assessingecosystem services provided by different types of

ecosystems on the basis of selected indicators,data and models. This framework will be used as abasis for the European assessment report to bedrawn up for the IPBES, and will therefore alsohave implications for the Norwegian data used inthe report. Norway has done a great deal toimprove the knowledge base on biodiversity inrecent years, by scaling up funding for mappingprogrammes, through the Norwegian TaxonomyInitiative and monitoring programmes, and byproducing knowledge syntheses. Thus, good pro-gress has already been made in Norway in synthe-sising information from indicators so that overallecosystem condition or ecological status can beassessed. However, Norway has not yet identifiedrelevant indicators and data for assessing ecosys-tem services, and there are no reviews of the over-all relationship between ecological status and theprovision of ecosystem services. Norway will con-tinue to support the work of the IPBES. In connec-tion with this, the Ministry of Climate and Envi-ronment will initiate a review of selected ecosys-tem services in consultation with relevant sectors.The work will be based on existing knowledge.


• Continue funding for the Research School inBiosystematics.

• Continue to support the work of the IPBES.

Figure 8.2 Mapping ecosystems and their services

Outline of a common framework for mapping ecosystems and their services, based on Figure 2 in EU Technical Report 2014 – 080,Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. The figure shows that an assessment of ecosystem services should be ba-sed on both mapping and monitoring data and a synthesis of information provided by indicators that give a picture of the overallcondition of an ecosystem. In addition, research and analysis are needed to understand more about how the condition of ecosys-tems is related to their capacity to provide ecosystem services.

Map ecosystems(mapping and monitoring, national databases, etc.)

Assess ecosystem services(indicators, data and models)

Assess the condition of ecosystems (syntheses of indicators, e.g. the Norwegian Nature Index)

Research(integrated ecosystem assessment)

How does condition relate to service provision?How do different ecosystem types interact to provide services?


8.5 Traditional knowledge

Traditional knowledge about sustainable manage-ment of the natural environment has been a keyelement throughout Norway’s history. Traditionalknowledge has been kept alive by coastal fisher-men who also graze livestock on coastal heathsand islands, through traditional Sami reindeerhusbandry, and by farmers who have supple-mented conventional arable land with hay fens,transhumance and summer farms, and wild rein-deer hunting. People have used natural resourcesfor food, medicine and as raw materials (for exam-ple for clothing and building materials), and thereare many customs, rituals and a large body of tra-ditional lore linked to different species. Most ofthe land area of Norway is or has been used insome way by people. Coastal waters have alsobeen actively used in a variety of ways. Tradition-ally, people harvested a much wider range ofresources than they do today. In many areas, thishas resulted in the development of characteristicbiotopes, each with its specific fauna and flora.Traditional knowledge can explain a great dealabout today’s landscapes, and is important forpeople’s sense of pride in their local history andculture and for maintaining its integrity. Tradi-tional knowledge is often not written down, butconsists of experience and knowledge that ispassed down through the generations in oral formand through its practical application.

Section 8 of the Nature Diversity Act requiresthe authorities to attach importance to any tradi-tional knowledge that is available when makingofficial decisions that will affect Norwegiannature. Traditional knowledge is often valuable forthe public authorities in decision-making pro-cesses. Such knowledge is vital when semi-naturalhabitats and landscapes are being restored andmanaged. The provisions of the Nature DiversityAct are based on similar provisions in the Conven-tion on Biological Diversity (Article 8 j)). Regula-tions on traditional knowledge associated withgenetic material are being drawn up under theNature Diversity Act. They will implement Nor-way’s obligations under the Nagoya Protocol onAccess and Benefit-sharing. The regulations areintended to ensure that the interests of indige-nous and local communities are safeguarded andrespected when others make use of their tradi-tional knowledge on genetic material.

In recent generations, there has been a steepdecline in traditional knowledge of nature in Nor-way, and more and more of our cultural and natu-ral heritage is being lost. This means that local

communities’ traditional knowledge of speciesand landscapes, and not least, our awareness ofour own place in nature, is gradually disappearing.Museums and archives in Norway have collectedand systematised information about traditionaluses of nature, particularly traditional agriculture,but also use of uncultivated areas. Information hasalso been collected in connection with researchon topics such as the cultural landscape. A greatdeal can be done to improve contact between peo-ple working in the scientific and cultural heritagefields. Little use has been made of this sourcematerial by the environmental authorities, and lit-tle has been done to make empirical knowledgeavailable to people working in other fields and tothe general public. Traditional knowledge must bemade accessible in accordance with guidelinesunder the Convention on Biological Diversity, andit is essential to ensure that access is given withthe consent of indigenous and local communities.This is particularly important when giving accessto traditional knowledge relating to genetic mate-rial developed by indigenous and local communi-ties.

In Sami areas of Norway, traditional knowl-edge is being retained because nature is stillbeing used in the traditional ways. This meansthat there is a large body of knowledge unique tothe Sami culture that it is important to safeguardfor both current and future generations. Little hasbeen done to synthesise knowledge relating toSami traditions and other traditional knowledge inNorway and make it accessible.

Two projects on traditional knowledge ofnature initiated by the Government are currentlyin progress, one specifically on Sami traditionalknowledge and one on people and the natural her-itage more generally. They are both making a val-uable contribution to collecting and systematisingtraditional knowledge, but this is far from enoughto safeguard traditional knowledge for the future.In addition, Norway is participating in cooperationunder the Arctic Council on the integration of tra-ditional knowledge into projects dealing withindigenous peoples’ use of species and ecosys-tems in the Arctic.


• Continue work to safeguard, systematise, collectand communicate traditional knowledge thatpromotes sustainable use, and facilitate interdis-ciplinary cooperation.

• Continue to spread information about traditio-nal ways of using nature, increase awareness of


the importance of safeguarding biodiversity andencourage local participation and engagementin the management of protected areas.

8.6 Access to information

Knowledge can only be applied if databases andmap applications are used to make informationpublicly available. The information must be easyto find and use, and it must be presented in a waythat is suitable for a variety of user groups. Accessis currently provided through many different data-bases and applications, developed for a variety ofpurposes, dealing with many different topics andtargeting different user groups.

Norway has made good progress in develop-ing tools and services to provide information onNorwegian nature. This is partly because there isnational consensus on data sharing: that institu-tions holding environmental data should haveagreements to share this with others, within acommon framework and using common stand-ards. Nevertheless, information is still somewhatfragmented. Applications and databases should befurther developed and improved to take advan-tage of technological developments. This willmake it easier for municipalities to make use ofthe information in their day-to-day work, and alsohelp other users and the general public.

On 19 December 2014, Norway adopted regu-lations on environmental impact assessment forplans under the Planning and Building Act and forprojects under sectoral legislation. These includeprovisions intended to ensure that impact assess-ments maintain high scientific standards and thatdata collected in connection with an impactassessment can be re-used. Guidelines on recog-nised methodology and the databases to be usedfor uploading data have been published.


• Ensure that data and databases for biodiversitymaintain high quality.

• Further develop, improve and simplify nationaldatabases to ensure good access to environmentalinformation for decision makers and the generalpublic, and consider better coordination of data-bases and more widespread sharing of data.

• Improve Norway’s land-use and environmentalstatistics.

• Ensure that as far as possible, all environmentaldata collected are uploaded to public databases.

8.7 Syntheses, risk assessments and analyses

The public administration also needs informationfrom various types of syntheses and risk assess-ments, and projections and scenarios for futuretrends. This information must be provided byexperts in the relevant fields. Examples of suchproducts in Norway include the Red List of Spe-cies and the Norwegian Red List for Ecosystemsand Habitat Types. These are both based on riskassessments – of the risk that species will becomeextinct in Norway and that habitats will be lost,respectively. Others are the publication Alien spe-cies in Norway – with the Norwegian Black List(based on ecological risk assessments for alienspecies), and the Norwegian Nature Index. Pro-jections and scenarios of future pressures on bio-diversity are important because they allow predic-tions of change and make it possible to adapt themanagement regime accordingly. We need knowl-edge of this kind about climate change and oceanacidification, and also about other important pres-sures such as habitat fragmentation. Knowledgeabout future impacts of climate change is basedon climate models. The IPCC is responsible forassessing and summarising knowledge aboutglobal- and regional-scale climate change in itsreports, and the IPBES for producing reports ofthe same type on biodiversity and ecosystem ser-vices. Similar reports are also published atnational level; for example, Norway published areport on the impacts of climate change in theNorwegian Arctic in 2010. There is also a gooddeal of regional cooperation on syntheses andassessments of biodiversity, for example withinthe framework of the Arctic Council.

The Government considers it important tocontinue to present syntheses of knowledge suchas those mentioned above. They provide informa-tion that forms an important basis for the work ofthe public administration, and is also valuable forthe general public and decision makers.


• Ensure that Norwegian Biodiversity Informa-tion Centre presents regular updates of the redlists for species and for habitat types and ecosys-tems.

• Ensure that the Norwegian Biodiversity Infor-mation Centre presents ecological risk assess-ments for alien species, and a Norwegian blacklist, every five years.


• Ensure that the Norwegian Nature Index isupdated every five years.

• Develop and apply methodology and tools forestablishing and displaying projections of ecosys-tem change and shifts in the distribution of spe-cies and habitats in response to climate change,ocean acidification and other pressures.

• Give priority to cooperation with neighbouringcountries and within the framework of the ArcticCouncil on the preparation of regional synthesesand projections of pressures on biodiversity.


9 Responsibilities of local and regional authorities

9.1 Nature as a resource for Norway’s municipalities

Nature itself is one of the most importantresources for Norway’s municipalities. It is thebasis for human settlement and industrial andcommercial activities, provides opportunities forrecreation and contributes to people’s sense ofidentity. Municipalities are showing a growinginterest in broad-based value creation based onboth natural and cultural resources. The munici-palities take all these factors into account in theirplanning, since this is important in making localcommunities attractive to business and industryand as places to live. It should therefore be part ofthe local authorities’ responsibilities to ensureproper management of the natural environment.

9.2 Land-use planning as an instrument for biodiversity management

9.2.1 General application of the Planning and Building Act

The Planning and Building Act provides themunicipalities with a very important instrument intheir efforts to safeguard Norwegian nature.Together, all the individual decisions made underthe Act strongly influence the development ofNorwegian society and how successfully biodiver-sity is safeguarded in both the long term and theshort term. Large, robust municipalities withgood nature management capacity and expertisecan play an effective role in achieving national andinternational targets relating to biodiversity.

Section 3-1 of the Planning and Building Actrequires municipal plans to:a. establish goals for the physical, environmental,

economic, social and cultural development ofmunicipalities and regions, identify socialneeds and tasks, and indicate how these taskscan be carried out,

b. safeguard land resources and landscape quali-ties and ensure the conservation of valuablelandscapes and cultural environments,

c. protect the natural resource base for the Samiculture, economic activity and way of life,

d. facilitate value creation and industrial and com-mercial development,

e. facilitate good design of the built environment,a good residential environment, a child-friendlyenvironment and good living standards in allparts of the country,

f. promote public health and counteract social ine-qualities in health, and help to prevent crime,

g. incorporate climate change considerations, forexample in energy supply, land-use and trans-port solutions,

h. strengthen civil protection by reducing therisks of loss of life, injury to health and damageto the environment and important infrastruc-ture, material assets, etc.

A healthy natural environment is essential forachieving most of these purposes, but the degreeto which nature and environmental considerationsare incorporated into municipal plans varies con-siderably from one municipality to another.Municipal plans often make it clear which areasshould be used for development and commercialactivities, but are less specific about areas thatshould be safeguarded.

Aichi target 2 highlights the importance ofintegrating the values of biodiversity into localdevelopment strategies and planning processes.In Norway, the municipalities play a key role indrawing up such strategies and plans. A goodplanning process can identify important compo-nents of biodiversity in a municipality and areasthat are important for connectivity and ecologicalcoherence. Systematic planning can also clarifywhat additional information is needed aboutnature in a municipality. A good planning processis one that ensures that residents, interest organi-sations, the business sector, landowners and oth-ers all take part, and where regional and centralgovernment authorities also participate and pro-vide guidance from an early stage. Planning pro-cesses that integrate biodiversity considerationswill make an important contribution to Norway’sachievement of Aichi target 2.


Planning routines for housing developments,industrial development, transport infrastructureand other sectors that also incorporate biodiver-sity considerations require land-use managementbased on close cooperation and clear priorities.Preparation of the social and land-use elements ofthe municipal master plan also gives the municipalauthorities the opportunity to consider both landand water areas of the municipality as an inte-grated whole. The social and the land-use ele-ments of a municipal master plan can both appro-priately be used to set overall long-term priorities,including priorities for the conservation of impor-tant species and habitats. In addition, the Planningand Building Act’s provisions on zoning plansallow for more detailed specification of how biodi-versity is to be safeguarded. The provisions onboth the land-use element of the municipal masterplan and zoning plans provide for areas to be des-ignated as green structure (nature areas, greencorridors, recreation areas and parks); as agricul-tural areas, areas of natural environment, outdoorrecreation areas and/or reindeer husbandryareas; and areas for use or conservation in the seaand river systems and along the shoreline. In theland-use element of a municipal master plan, it isalso possible to designate zones where specialconsiderations apply, for example as regards out-door recreation, the green structure, the land-scape, or conservation of the natural or culturalenvironment – for example in buffer zones aroundnational parks or protected landscapes. The samezones may be designated in the zoning plan, oralternatively, their purpose can be achieved byspecifying permissible types of land-use and lay-ing down other appropriate provisions. When pro-cessing building applications, the municipality caninfluence matters such as where buildings areplaced on a site, which can be important for biodi-versity conservation. Provided that certain condi-tions are met, municipalities may grant exemp-tions from the provisions of their plans. Thismeans that the strictness or leniency of the prac-tice they follow when considering exemptionsmay have implications for trends in ecological sta-tus in the ecosystems concerned.

Regional plans are drawn up by the countyauthorities. They are particularly important forhabitats and species whose distribution extendsacross municipal and county boundaries. Theregional approach has for example been used indrawing up plans for the seven national conserva-tion areas for wild reindeer in the mountains in thesouthern half of Norway. Such plans can containbinding regional planning provisions on land use.

In the case of transport infrastructure projects,the central government transport authorities canreach agreement with the municipal and regionalplanning authorities to take over part of their nor-mal role in preparing regional and municipal sub-plans and zoning plans. This is set out in section 3-7 of the Planning and Building Act. Transportinfrastructure plans are processed and adopted inaccordance with the Act’s ordinary provisions.This means that the county authorities normallymake decisions on regional sub-plans and themunicipalities on municipal sub-plans and zoningplans. However, in the case of major transportinfrastructure projects, central government land-use plans may be drawn up instead. In such cases,the Ministry of Local Government and Moderni-sation has the authority to make planning deci-sions. The Government has indicated that centralgovernment land-use plans will be more widelyused for large-scale transport projects.

Regional master plans and municipal masterplans that include guidelines or set a frameworkfor future developments, and zoning plans thatcould have substantial effects on the environmentand society, must include a description andassessment of the effects of the plan on the envi-ronment and society, including its effects on biodi-versity. This is required by the regulations onenvironmental impact assessment for projectsunder the Planning and Building Act. The purposeis to ensure that the possible impacts of develop-ments are taken into account, and to ensure anopen process in which all stakeholders can maketheir opinions heard. Norway has two sets of reg-ulations on environmental impact assessment, forplans under the Planning and Building Act and forprojects under sectoral legislation. Guidelineshave been published on recognised methodology,the databases to be used for uploading data, andon Appendix III of the regulations on how toassess whether a project will have significanteffects on the environment and society.

Some sectors have drawn up further guidanceon environmental impact assessment within theirareas of responsibility, as the transport sector hasdone.

9.2.2 Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity

Land-use conversion and land-use change is themost important driver of biodiversity change inNorway today. It is therefore vital to ensure thatthere is an integrated planning system in whicheffects on biodiversity are considered for largerareas and larger numbers of projects and develop-


ments at the same time. The land-use element ofthe municipal master plan is a key part of the long-term basis for municipal planning. It is intended toshow how community development is linked tofuture land use, and how important areas of natu-ral environment will be safeguarded. It is requiredto indicate both development and conservationneeds. Identifying important habitats and ecosys-tems and analysing their connectivity and ecologi-cal coherence is a complex task that requires anoverall analysis. It is a challenging task to inte-grate such analyses into work on a municipal mas-ter plan, and as a result there is considerable vari-ation in how fully biodiversity is included inmunicipal planning processes.

If the overall framework for land-use and com-munity development, including biodiversity con-siderations, has already been assessed, clarifiedand incorporated into the municipal master plan, itwill be possible to deal with detailed plans forhousing developments, commercial activities,infrastructure development and other mattersmore quickly and predictably. This will benefitlocal communities, the business sector and otherstakeholders. At present, detailed planning pro-cesses are in a number of cases delayed by time-consuming conflicts between environmental andother interests. To a large extent, these conflictsshould have been resolved during the preparationof municipal master plans. More purposeful workto identify biodiversity values during the prepara-tion of municipal master plans would pave the wayfor better integrated and more predictable munici-pal nature management. It would also put themunicipalities in a better position to implementtheir land-use policy.

Section 11-1 of the Planning and Building Actprovides for the municipalities to draw up munici-pal sub-plans for specific topics. Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity, in which biodiversity oflocal, regional and national importance is identi-fied and taken into account, will provide valuableinput for more thorough processes to find a bal-ance between different interests when the land-useelement of the municipal master plan is prepared.In the Government’s view, a better framework isneeded to encourage municipalities to obtain anoverview of biodiversity within their boundariesand identify species and areas that it is importantto safeguard, and to do so at an early stage ofpreparations for the municipal master plan.

Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity would notbe legally binding, but their preparation wouldprovide opportunities for broad participation andpolitical discussions about priorities. A biodiver-

sity plan would be adopted through a political pro-cess, and would provide guidelines for how biodi-versity considerations should be incorporated intothe municipal master plan, for example by specify-ing permissible types of land-use, laying downother appropriate provisions or designating areaswhere special considerations apply. The countygovernors would, as they normally do, give themunicipalities information on biodiversity andguidance on the best ways of incorporating biodi-versity considerations into their plans. There is noprovision for making objections to a municipalsub-plan, but in the Government’s view, the plan-ning work would provide good opportunities fordialogue and cooperation between municipalitiesand county governors at an early stage. This couldreduce or prevent conflict and objections at a laterstage, during the preparation of municipal masterplans.

Under the procedural requirements of thePlanning and Building Act, local residents, inter-est groups, the business sector and others wouldneed to be involved in the planning process formunicipal biodiversity plans, thus supporting thegoal of strengthening local democracy. The plan-ning process would not only clarify which nation-ally and regionally important biodiversity munici-palities should safeguard, but would also be anopportunity for them to identify locally importantbiodiversity. Where appropriate, municipalitiescould also seek to create synergies between biodi-versity conservation and safeguarding outdoorrecreation areas that are important for local resi-dents. The identification of biodiversity of nationalimportance would also be useful for the centralgovernment.

The Government would like to emphasise theimportance of leaving it to the municipal councilsthemselves to decide whether or not to start thepreparation of a municipal biodiversity plan. Inmany cases, it will be easier to draw up the land-use element of the municipal master plan if a bio-diversity sub-plan is already in place. Neverthe-less, municipalities must be able to incorporatebiodiversity considerations directly into the land-use element of the municipal master plan withoutfirst preparing up a biodiversity sub-plan if theyconsider this to be a better approach. There is noquestion of requiring municipalities to draw upbiodiversity sub-plans. However, the Governmentwill encourage municipalities to do so and willtake steps to facilitate this approach. The centralgovernment could provide financial assistance forthe preparation of biodiversity sub-plans as oneway of encouraging this.


Municipalities that draw up biodiversity sub-plans will incur costs, but these may be partly off-set by efficiency gains in the subsequent planningprocess. Work on municipal biodiversity sub-planswill also supplement the work being done at cen-tral government level on valuing and safeguardingbiodiversity and ecosystem services. It will alsoboost biodiversity expertise in the municipalities.The Government will initiate a pilot project onmunicipal sub-plans as a biodiversity conservationtool. It may also be appropriate to include othermodels for incorporating biodiversity into munici-pal planning processes in the project. The pilotproject will be carried out in selected municipali-ties in 2016 and 2017, and will then be evaluated.

Inter-municipal cooperation on incorporatingbiodiversity considerations into municipal plan-ning processes would be useful. It would allowclose coordination across municipal boundaries.This would benefit biodiversity directly and couldalso be important in ensuring the smooth runningof road construction projects and other majorinfrastructure projects.


• Initiate a pilot project on the use of municipalsub-plans as a biodiversity conservation tool.

9.3 Municipal capacity, expertise and commitment

The municipalities must have sufficient adminis-trative capacity, sound scientific expertise innature management, knowledge about biodiver-sity in the municipality and adequate managementexpertise to be able to draw up good plans thatensure sustainable management and land use andprevent the loss of biodiversity. An Official Norwe-gian Report (NOU 2013:10) on the values relatedto ecosystem services highlights the crucialimportance of strengthening the expertise of themunicipal sector to ensure sound management ofecosystems and ecosystem services.

If municipalities are actively involved in biodi-versity conservation, public interest and engage-ment may also be stimulated. This in turn canhelp to keep biodiversity on the municipal policyagenda over time. But this kind of positive feed-back only works if municipal politicians, the localadministration and residents all feel a sense ofownership of the biodiversity values that need tobe safeguarded. In this context, the Governmentwould like to emphasise that it is up to the munici-

palities themselves to define which areas, speciesand habitats it is particularly important to safe-guard at local level. The municipalities must regis-ter and map such areas as a basis for includingthem in biodiversity sub-plans, see Chapter 9.2.2.This work will be an important supplement to theconservation of areas of national importance, asdescribed in Chapters 6 and 7. The Governmentwill consider more closely how registration andmapping of locally important areas, species andhabitats should be organised.

The Directorate for Cultural Heritage is cur-rently running a programme to modernise cul-tural heritage management and make it moreeffective. For this to be successful, it is essentialto build up cultural heritage expertise in themunicipalities. The Directorate has drawn upguidelines to assist the municipalities in drawingup cultural heritage sub-plans. The Governmentwill consider whether elements of this pro-gramme are also applicable to efforts to build upmunicipal expertise and engagement on biodiver-sity. The Government is also seeking to simplifythe administrative system for uncultivated areas.

The Government has also initiated a reform oflocal and regional government, which is intendedto result in more robust municipalities with thenecessary scientific expertise and capacity. TheGovernment’s efforts to build up knowledgeabout nature and make this available will provide avital basis for continued municipal work on biodi-versity in the planning context, see Chapter 8.


• Ensure that there is adequate scientific expertisein nature management in the municipalities.

9.4 The municipal revenue system

National parks and other protected areas areestablished to safeguard national interests andmeet international obligations. They can be seenas public goods of substantial value, but themunicipalities that are directly affected only bene-fit from them to a limited extent. Revenue fromnature-based tourism, for example, does benefitthe municipalities, but the overall national valuederived from these areas may be much greaterthan this. And although protected areas do have avalue for local communities, the way they can beused is restricted, and this may entail a risk of theloss of municipal revenue: protection may hamperthe development of commercial activities in pro-


tected areas. The municipalities do not receiveany financial compensation for these potentiallosses, although they take the risk on behalf of thenation as a whole. This situation has been high-lighted by two Official Norwegian Reports, NOU2009:16 on global environmental problems andNorwegian policy, and NOU 2013:10 on the valuesrelated to ecosystem services. Both reports rec-ommended changes so that there is better har-mony between responsibilities and incentives. InNOU 2013:10, one of the recommendations is tocarry out a review of a system of economic incen-tives for municipalities to safeguard biodiversityand ecosystem services. The report also recom-mends reconsidering whether to use a model thatincludes a municipality’s environmental effortsand performance as criteria when block grantsare allocated.

In principle, block grants are intended to allo-cate funding to the municipalities on the basis oftheir real needs in terms of expenses, using crite-ria that the municipalities themselves have no con-trol over. Rewarding actual environmental effortsand/or performance would therefore be in con-flict with the principles for awarding block grants.A criterion based on the total protected area in amunicipality would be technically possible to use,and this is determined by central governmentdecisions, not by municipal decisions. However,this criterion would reflect a potential loss of reve-nue, not necessary expenses, and there is littlereason to assume that a possible loss of revenue isproportional to the area protected. Moreover, pro-tected areas may also offer opportunities for valuecreation in municipalities, as mentioned earlier,and this can be difficult to include in the calcula-tions. This issue has already been discussed in the2011 proposition to the Storting on local govern-ment, and the Government maintains its positionthat this should not be included in the set of crite-ria for allocating block grants to the municipali-ties.

9.5 Guidance on integrating biodiversity into planning processes

The municipalities are required to take overallcentral government and regional interests intoaccount in their planning. New official Govern-ment expectations for regional and municipalplanning were adopted by royal decree on 12 June2015. The county and municipal councils must usethem as a basis for work on regional and munici-

pal planning strategies and plans, and they alsoapply to central government participation in theseplanning processes. The Government expecta-tions highlight the importance of identifying andsafeguarding important species, habitats and eco-system services.

Section 11-1, second paragraph, of the Plan-ning and Building Act makes it clear that munici-pal master plans must take municipal, regionaland central government interests into account.Moreover, the objects clause of the Local Govern-ment Act requires arrangements to be made forrational and effective administration of commonmunicipal and county interests within the overallframework of Norwegian society and with a viewto sustainable development.

The Government considers it important thatthe municipalities have a considerable degree offreedom to set land-use management priorities. Atthe same time, there are many divergent andsometimes conflicting interests that must be iden-tified and weighed up against each other duringplanning processes. The central governmentadministration must clarify which components ofbiodiversity are of national or regional value andmust therefore be given special consideration,and must provide the best possible knowledgebase on biodiversity for use in municipal land-useplanning. It is also a central government responsi-bility to provide guidance with a view to moderat-ing the cumulative environmental effects ofhuman activity. Documents that have been pro-duced relating to the Planning and Building Actinclude guidelines on planning the green struc-ture in towns and built-up areas and on planningholiday housing.

To ensure that national and significantregional interests are taken into account, relevantcentral government and regional bodies and theSámediggi (Sami parliament) are entitled to raiseobjections to drafts of the land-use element ofmunicipal master plans or zoning plans. Othermunicipalities that are affected may also raiseobjections if the issues involved are of significanceto them. The right to put forward objections iscontingent on a preceding administrative processallowing real participation by and cooperationbetween the sectoral authorities, the county andthe municipality. To prevent unnecessarily largenumbers of objections concerning biodiversity,the Government considers it important for thecounty governor to provide information andadvice on valuable biodiversity in the municipali-ties involved at the earliest possible stage of plan-ning processes. A good dialogue between the


county governor and the municipalities will beconducive to land-use planning that strikes a satis-factory balance between biodiversity interests andother public interests.

The Government wishes to strengthen localdemocracy, reduce the number of objections toplans and facilitate a greater degree of local adap-tation of land-use policy. Its main approach is toencourage more use of thematic municipal sub-plans, is intended to make it easier for the munici-palities to incorporate biodiversity conservationinto planning processes. To give the municipali-ties a more predictable framework, the Govern-ment will draw up better guidance documents thatclarify how they are expected to include biodiver-sity considerations in their planning activities. Inthis connection, the Government will also reviewexisting guidance material with a view to improv-ing and simplifying the documents. Revision ofthe guidelines for planning in coastal waters hasalready been started.

Climate change adaptation is becoming a par-ticularly important task for the municipalities. Theecosystem services provided by nature can play amajor role in climate change adaptation, particu-larly regulating services such as natural flood con-trol, water purification and protection against ero-sion. Another factor that must be taken into con-sideration in connection with climate change iswhether special measures will be needed for habi-tat types that may be particularly seriouslyaffected by climate change. The municipalitieswill have a substantial need for advice in this fieldin the time ahead.


• Continue to develop guidance material for muni-cipalities on how to integrate biodiversity conser-vation into their activities.

• Develop guidance material for municipalities onhow they can make use of ecosystem services intheir climate change adaptation work.

9.6 Biodiversity in towns and built-up areas

Many towns and built-up areas in Norway are inor near productive areas in the lowlands and alongthe coast, which have always been attractive areasfor human settlement. Biodiversity was originallyvery high in these areas, and they still containpatches of natural habitat and habitats used bymany threatened and other species. Connections

between the different green spaces in towns andother built-up areas make it possible for many spe-cies to move between them, thus promoting thespread of biodiversity and genetic diversity. Greenspaces are also important because they give peo-ple opportunities for enjoying the outdoors andoutdoor recreation and play. At the same time,there is constant pressure to allow development ofthese areas. In built-up areas, artificial habitatscan often function as substitute biotopes for spe-cies in built-up areas. Innovative examples of thisinclude green roofs and walls.

Some towns have begun to restore areas ofnatural habitat. This can be encouraged throughurban planning and development processes. Anumber of culverted rivers and streams have beenre-opened so that they form part of the greenstructure.

Although towns and built-up areas are heavilymodified ecosystems, there is considerable poten-tial for retaining areas within them that are ofimportance for biodiversity. Safeguarding theenvironment also has positive effects on people’swell-being and the quality of their lives.

Green spaces in towns and built-up areas areunder pressure, and the total area of such spacesis declining. At the same time, many threatenedspecies and habitats are found in and aroundurban areas. The Government therefore consid-ers it important that existing instruments, particu-larly the Planning and Building Act, are used tosafeguard biodiversity in towns and built-up areas,and that the municipalities receive sound guid-ance on how to do this.

Figure 9.1 Green spaces in Oslo

Green spaces in Oslo and areas lost in the period 1999–2004Source: Engelien with more 2005


Many outdoor recreation areas in and neartowns and built-up areas are also valuable for bio-diversity. Work in the outdoor recreation sector istherefore also important for biodiversity conser-vation in towns. Two examples of initiatives thatare relevant in this connection are the nationalstrategy for outdoor recreation and a programmerun by the Norwegian Environment Agency toencourage more physical activity, especially bychildren and young people, and to safeguard moreoutdoor recreation areas near people’s homes.

The Government considers it important togive priority to biodiversity conservation in townsand built-up areas. One approach that can be use-ful is cooperation between private- and public-sec-tor landowners in developing and managing green

spaces of various types and sizes. Programmessuch as the initiative for development of theGroruddalen area of eastern Oslo, which involvescooperation between the City of Oslo and the Gov-ernment, are valuable for the area involved. Theyalso provide opportunities for exchanging infor-mation with other towns and for developing exam-ples of good practice. The first ten-year period ofthe Groruddalen initiative is coming to an end,and it will be continued for another ten years from2017. Local community development will be one ofthe three main themes from 2017. This willinclude developing green spaces and waterwaysnear residential areas, which will also play a partin the conservation of urban biodiversity.

Chapter 4–9Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment

Norway’s national biodiversity action plan


Nature for life

Published by:Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment

Public institutions may order additional copies from:Norwegian Government Security and Service OrganisationE-mail: [email protected]: www.publikasjoner.dep.noTelephone: + 47 222 40 000Cover illustration: Marit HovlandPrint: 07 PrintMedia 11/2016 – Impression 400

07 PRINTMEDIA – 2041 03

79

MIL

JØ

MERKET TRYKKERI