Protected area as indicator of ecological sustainability? A century of development in Europe’s boreal forest

Marine Elbakidze, Per Angelstam, Nikolay Sobolev, Erik Degerman, Kjell Andersson, Robert Axelsson, Olle Höjer, Sandra Wennberg

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Boreal forests: why?Boreal forests: why? The second largest biome in the world

( � 33% of all forests globally) Global importance for mitigation and

adaptation to climate change An opportunity for conservation with high

ambition levels, including ecological integrity and resilience

Aim Aim

To analyze and compare the development over time of formally PAs as an indicator of ecological sustainability in Europe’s boreal forest regions and countries

Boreal forests in EuropeBoreal forests in Europe

Bohn et al. 2004

Collected dataCollected data

On terrestrial and inland water areas that were or are formally protected since the 1900th

The database includes: - name of a PA - national designation to a particular category - location (northern, middle or southern boreal forests) - size (in ha) - year of designation - year of conversion of a PA to other type of PA or unprotected

area - IUCN management category Identified a total of 17 086 PAs

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Mill

ion

s, h

a,

Southern Middle Northern Total

ResultsResults1.1. Protected areas over time in Europe’s boreal forest

ResultsResults

The total PA in Europe’s boreal forest increased steadily from the 1900th to the 2010th

However, there was considerable variation in dynamics among different decades and northern, middle and southern boreal forests

During eight decades out of ten the main growth in the total area of PAs took place in the northern boreal forest

ResultsResults Strict nature reserves (I) and national parks (II)

were the main categories of PAs’ during the first four decades

Their area proportion sharply declined in the 1960s The current ‘set’ of PA categories was established in

the 1970s The area proportions for current PAs’ management

categories have been relatively stable since the 1990s

Results2. Comaprisson among the countries

Total area proportion (%) of PAs Average annual change (%) of total area

Country In 1909 In 1950 In 2010 1909 to 1950 1950 to 2010

Norway Northern 0 0.0 18.9 <0.001 0.3

Middle 0 0.1 13.7 0.003 0.6

Southern 0 0.0 5.3 <0.001 0.1

Sweden Northern 0.3 1.0 32.6 0.015 0.6

Middle 0.0 0.0 6.1 <0.001 0.1

Southern 0.0 0.0 5.5 <0.001 0.1

Finland Northern 0 3.1 21.3 0.045 0.4

Middle 0 0.1 2.6 0.003 0.1

Southern 0 0.7 4.4 0.010 0.1

Russia Northern 0 1.1 14.6 0.028 0.3

Middle 0 0.2 10.3 0.003 0.2

Southern 0 0.3 11.9 0.007 0.2

The annual change (in %) of the increase The annual change (in %) of the increase of total proportion of PAs in the boreal forestsof total proportion of PAs in the boreal forests

ResultsResultsThe median size of PA: 124 ha in Russia 64 ha in Sweden 48 ha in Norway 10 ha in Finland

ConclusionsConclusions

The existing PAs shows a poor representativity among the northern, middle and southern boreal forests since the beginning of 20th century.

As a result, by the end of 2010 the area proportion of PAs was 10.8% of the total boreal forest area in Europe with 17.2% of the total area of northern, 7.9% of the middle and 8.7% of the southern boreal forests.

ConclusionsConclusions The uneven representativity of PAs in Europe’s boreal biome

and each country that was maintained during almost the entire century has been and is a big challenge for boreal biodiversity conservation today

Another challenge: the vast majority of boreal PAs are small in size, with the smallest areas in the southern boreal forest

The area proportion of protection is an important indicator for conservation efforts; however, it does not necessarily mean that PA networks are in place in terms of providing functional habitat networks for different ecosystems, or for ecological sustainability.