Copy igh © 2013 by he au ho (s). Published he e unde license by he Resilience Alliance.
Hagen, D., K. S a a sdo i , C. Nilsson, A. K. Tol anen, K. Raulund-Rasmussen, Á. L. A adó i , A.
Fosaa, and G. Halldo sson. 2013. Ecological and social dimensions o ecosys em es o a ion in he No dic
coun ies. Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.5751/ES-05891-180434
Syn hesis, pa o a Special Fea u e on Ecological Res o a ion in No he n Regions
Ecological and Social Dimensions o Ecosys em Res o a ion in he No dic
Coun ies
Dagma Hagen 1, K is in S a a sdo i 2, Ch is e Nilsson 3, Anne K. Tol anen 4,5, Ka s en Raulund-Rasmussen 6, Àsa L.
A adò i 7, Anna Ma ia Fosaa 8 and Gudmundu Halldo sson 2
ABSTRACT. An in e na ional o e iew o he ex en and ype o ecological es o a ion can o e new pe spec i es o
unde s anding, planning, and implemen a ion. The No dic coun ies, wi h a g ea ange o na u al condi ions bu his o ically
simila social and poli ical s uc u es, p o ide an oppo uni y o compa e es o a ion app oaches and e o s ac oss bo de s. The
aim o his s udy was o explo e a ia ion in ecological es o a ion using he No dic coun ies as an example. We used ecen
na ional assessmen s and expe e alua ions o ecological es o a ion. Res o a ion e o s di e ed among coun ies: o es and
pea land es o a ion was mos common in Finland, eshwa e es o a ion was mos common in Sweden, es o a ion o na u al
hea hlands and g asslands was mos common in Iceland, es o a ion o na u al and semi-cul u al hea hlands was mos common
in No way, and es o a ion o cul u al ecosys ems, mainly abandoned ag icul u al land, was mos common in Denma k. Ecological
es o a ion cu en ly does no occu on he Fa oe Islands. Economic incen i es in luence ecological es o a ion and depend on
laws and policies in each coun y. Ou analyses sugges ha habi a ypes de e mine he me hods o ecological es o a ion,
whe eas socio-economic d i e s a e mo e impo an o he decisions conce ning he iming and loca ion o es o a ion. To
imp o e he unde s anding, planning, and implemen a ion o ecological es o a ion, we ad oca e inc eased coope a ion and
knowledge sha ing ac oss disciplines and among coun ies, bo h in he No dic coun ies and in e na ionally. An ob ious ad an age
o such coope a ion is ha a wide ange o expe iences om di e en habi a s and di e en socio-economic condi ions becomes
a ailable and hus p o ides a mo e solid basis o de eloping p ac ical solu ions o es o a ion me hods and policies.
Key Wo ds: economic incen i es; habi a s; land use p essu e; no he n Eu ope; egional scale; es o a ion e o s
INTRODUCTION
Ecological es o a ion has become an impo an p ac ice o
coun e ac ing ecosys em deg ada ion, imp o ing ecosys em
se ices and biodi e si y, and mi iga ing global clima e
change (e.g., MEA 2005, Bullock e al. 2011, Hobbs e al.
2011). Ecological es o a ion p ojec s a y wi h ega d o
objec i es, designs, and s akeholde s, and ela e di e en ly o
geog aphical, poli ical, and his o ical ac o s. They also ange
in scale, me hods, and le el o in e en ion (Hobbs and C ame
2008). Ecological es o a ion can be mo i a ed by a numbe
o ac o s, including a need o inc eased a eas o odde o
uel, o o he p o ision o o he ecosys em se ices, such as
clean wa e o clima e change mi iga ion; o biodi e si y
conse a ion; o simply o coun e ac ing land deg ada ion
( o example, Hobbs and No on 1996, Clewell and A onson
2006, Suding 2011). A numbe o inancial and non inancial
mechanisms can also d i e ecological es o a ion, including
inancial incen i es by na ional o egional go e nmen s (de
G oo e al. 2007), law and policies, and olun a y wo k by
locals o nongo e nmen al o ganiza ions (NGOs) (McGhee e
al. 2007).
The many and a ied es o a ion p ojec s ha ha e been
unde aken du ing he las ew decades p o ide an oppo uni y
o analyze how di e en geog aphical, poli ical, his o ical, and
ecological ac o s in luence ecological es o a ion and i s
implemen a ion. We p esen such an analysis, using he No dic
coun ies as an example. The No dic coun ies show many
simila i ies in e ms o social, poli ical, and his o ical
backg ounds. They p o ide a ange o habi a s wi h a ious
deg ees o abandonmen , land use p essu e, and deg ada ion,
which pose a a ie y o challenges o es o a ion. Fu he mo e,
he No dic coun ies simul aneously p o ide se e al
ecosys em se ices ha a e impo an on an in e na ional scale,
such as ca bon seques a ion, ec ea ion, and biodi e si y.
A mul idisciplina y ne wo k o scien is s, p ac i ione s,
policy-make s, and en ep eneu s was es ablished in 2009 in
o de o imp o e No dic collabo a ion and compile an
o e iew o ongoing ecological es o a ion ac i i ies
(Halldó sson e al. 2012). The o e iew, oge he wi h
addi ional in o ma ion om scien i ic publica ions, epo s,
websi es, and expe judgmen , was used o analyze ecological
es o a ion in he No dic coun ies in o de o answe he
ollowing ques ions: (1) Do ecological es o a ion e o s
e lec he le el o deg ada ion and land use p essu e? (2) How
do es o a ion ac i i ies a y among habi a s? (3) How do
d i e s like policy, legisla ion, and economy in luence
ecological es o a ion?
1No wegian Ins i u e o Na u e Resea ch, 2Soil Conse a ion Se ice o Iceland, 3Landscape Ecology G oup, Depa men o Ecology and En i onmen al
Science, Umeå Uni e si y, 4Finnish Fo es Resea ch Ins i u e, Oulu Uni , 5Thule Ins i u e, Uni e si y o Oulu, 6Depa men o Geosciences and Na u al
Resou ce Managemen , Uni e si y o Copenhagen, 7Facul y o En i onmen al Sciences, Ag icul u al Uni e si y o Iceland, 8Fa oese Museum o Na u al
His o y
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
Fig. 1. The s udy a ea includes Denma k, he Fa oe Islands, Finland, Iceland, No way, and
Sweden. The igu e shows he dis ibu ion o he main ege a ion zones illus a ing he
a ia ion in physical condi ions wi hin he egion. Based on da a om Tuhkanen (1987),
Moen (1999), and B. T aus ason and T. H. Jónsson (unpublished da a o Iceland).
We s a by desc ibing o each No dic coun y he land use
condi ions, oge he wi h his o ical and p esen ecological
es o a ion; we hen discuss he simila i ies and dissimila i ies
among coun ies, and inally, pu ou conclusions in a b oade
pe spec i e.
THE NORDIC COUNTRIES
Geog aphy and land use his o y
The No dic coun ies a e loca ed on he no he n Eu opean
mainland and in he No h A lan ic be ween 54° and 71° N
and 24° W and 30° E. Fi e coun ies (Denma k, Finland,
Iceland, No way, and Sweden) and one associa ed e i o y
(Fa oe Islands) we e included in his s udy (Fig. 1), bu we
e e o hem all as coun ies. The No dic coun ies co e
app oxima ely 1.3 million km2 o abou 13% o he land a ea
in Eu ope (Table 1), and include Eu ope’s no he nmos
(No way) and wes e nmos (Iceland) coun ies. All excep
Denma k and he Fa oe Islands each he A c ic Ci cle. The
No dic coun ies encompass a ange o en i onmen al
condi ions. Fi e ege a ion zones a e p esen —a c ic, alpine,
bo eal, bo eonemo al, and nemo al—o which, he bo eal zone
is he la ges (Fig. 1) (Tuhkanen 1987, Moen 1999). All
coun ies ha e unde gone a ious deg ees o ecosys em
deg ada ion, such as de o es a ion, we land d ainage, i e
channeliza ion and agmen a ion, o e g azing o hea hland,
u baniza ion and cons uc ion wo ks, and in oduc ion o
exo ic species (Halldó sson e al. 2012). They also sha e a
common his o y and ha e simila socie al and cul u al ai s.
All coun ies a e membe s o he No dic Council; Denma k,
Finland, and Sweden belong o he Eu opean Union (EU); and
Iceland and No way a e pa o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
and a i y legisla ion simila o ha o he EU in many ields,
including he en i onmen .
Ag icul u e has in luenced all coun ies o millennia, and
mode n o es y has in luenced mos o hem o cen u ies, bu
he ype and in ensi y o hese land uses ha e changed in ecen
decades. T adi ional cul u al landscapes, such as pas u es,
angelands, and s eams used o imbe loa ing ha e been
abandoned, and he associa ed ecosys ems a e changing
because o a ious successional and eco e y p ocesses
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
Table 1. Geog aphic and land co e in o ma ion o he six No dic coun ies (see also Fig. 1). De ini ions and desc ip ions o
he land co e ypes a e no comple ely cong uen in he di e en na ional s a is ics.
Denma k1Fa oe2
Islands Finland3Iceland4No way†5Sweden6
A ea (km2) 43,094 1393 338,424 103,000 324,300 450,295
Popula ion densi y 127 35 17 3 15 21
Highes al i ude (me e s abo e sea
le el) 171 882 1324 2110 2469 2097
Land co e %
Fo es 14 < 1 45 1 38 53
We land/pea land 5 1 26 6 6 9
Hea h and na u al g assland 3 78 4 31 46‡ 7
F eshwa e sys em 2 1 10 2 7 9
Ag icul u al land 66 8 8 2 3 8
Buil up land 10 5 1 3
Ba en land 12 2 29 7 12
† S alba d no included
1 h p://www.ds .dk/
3 Finnish S a is ical Yea book o Fo es y 2011
5 h p://www.s a ka .no/
‡ Including low-alpine hea hs
2 Fosaa e al. 2006
4 Hallsdó i e al. 2012
6 h p://www.scb.se/s a is ik/_publika ione /
MI0803_2005A01_BR_MI03BR0801.pd
(Olsson e al. 2000, Nilsson e al. 2005). Land use p essu es
ela ed o cons uc ion, oad building, ene gy de elopmen ,
ou ism, and he mining indus y a e inc easing and cause
s ess on na u al en i onmen s on small and la ge scales
(Nilsson e al. 2010). Alien species ans o m ecosys ems,
including in en ionally in oduced species, e.g., in o es y
(La sen 1995, Øyen 1999, Gede aas e al. 2012) and
eclama ion (Magnusson 2010).
The No dic coun ies ha e a long adi ion o coope a ion on
a ious en i onmen al issues (e.g., No dic Council o
Minis e s 2008). They cu en ly pu an inc easing emphasis
on es o ing ecosys ems a ec ed by deg ada ion. Al hough
ecological es o a ion ac i i ies in he egion ha e inc eased
in ecen decades, some e o s da e back mo e han a cen u y
(Magnússon 1997, C o s 2011) bu ha e, o e ime, been
desc ibed using a ious e ms. Un il ecen ly, he e has been
e y limi ed coope a ion on ecological es o a ion issues in
he egion (Halldo sson e al. 2012).
Land use p essu e and ecological es o a ion
Denma k
The po en ial ege a ion in Denma k is mixed nemo al
deciduous o es domina ed by beech (Fagus syl a ica).
Today, only a ew mino o es emnan s wi hou in ensi e
managemen a e le . Mos o es s a e in ensi ely managed
ei he by he use o non-na i e species, such as No way sp uce
(Picea abies) in e en-aged monocul u es, o as s ongly
homogenized b oad-lea ed s ands (No d-La sen e al. 2010).
Mos o he land a ea is managed o ag icul u e, including
high li es ock densi y and he in ensi e use o e ilize s and
pes icides, which esul s in se e e eu ophica ion and pollu ion
o eshwa e and shallow ma ine wa e s (Nø ing and
Jø gensen 2009, Nielsen e al. 2012). Fu he mo e, ecosys ems
such as ipa ian zones, shallow lakes, and we meadows ha e
been d ained, and s eams and i e s ha e been channelized
o maximize land o ag icul u e.
Res o a ion ac i i ies in Denma k a e ela ed o bo h
abandoned ag icul u al land and o es s, whe eas he
ehabili a ion o i e s and lakes equen ly aims a mi iga ing
signi ican eu ophica ion and imp o ing habi a s o alued
biodi e si y (Table 2) (Mo sing e al. 2013). Fo es es o a ion
includes se ing aside na u al o es s wi hou managemen , and
mo e equen ly, con e sion o mo e na u e- iendly
managemen p ac ices (La sen 2012). The la ges es o a ion
p ojec in Denma k is he es o a ion o he Skje n Ri e
(Pede sen e al. 2007). I s main pu pose is o es o e na u al
ni ogen and phospho ous e en ion p ocesses and we land
habi a s, and o s op och e mobiliza ion in he eclaimed
meadows. Res o a ion akes place mainly on public land, bu
he e a e also la ge p i a e-d i en p ojec s. P ojec s a e
inanced by he s a e, EU unds, and p i a e unds (Table 3).
Fa oe Islands
In ensi e sheep g azing has changed ecosys ems h oughou
he Fa oe Islands, and he isk o landslide haza ds is inc easing
(Fosaa and Simonsen 2011). Pea has played an impo an ole
as uel o he Fa oese popula ion, and pea ha es ing has
changed he soil condi ions and landscape locally.
Hyd opowe exploi a ion has also exe ed p essu e on he land
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
Table 2. Summa y o ecological es o a ion app oaches in he No dic coun ies a e habi a s. The able desc ibes he cu en
bes a ailable knowledge and was compiled using na ional epo s and da abases, oge he wi h o he published da a.
Coun ies Fo es We land/pea land F eshwa e sys em Hea hland/na u al
g assland Cul u al Key e e ences
Denma k In ensi e ac i i ies,
including se -aside
unmanaged o es s and
con e sion o
plan a ion o mo e
na u e like s uc u es;
also es o a ion o
o me ly a i icial
d ained land
In ensi e ac i i ies
es o ing and
ehabili a ing aised
bogs, meadows, and
ipa ian zones;
managemen by
con olled g azing in
o de o a oid
o e g owing by ees
Ri e s and lakes a e
in ensi ely es o ed
and managed o
conse a ion;
biomanipula ion and P-
p ecipi a ion in lakes
a e ools o en used o
mi iga e
eu ophica ion; i e s
a e es o ed o e-
meande
In ensi e
managemen o
cul u al hea hlands
in o de o a oid
o e g owing and o
conse e
cha ac e is ic
habi a s and species
Ma ginal lands,
o en eclaimed
we lands, a e being
es o ed;
a o es a ion aking
place o p o ec
g oundwa e and o
ec ea ional
pu poses
La sen and Nielsen
2007, Jeppesen e al.
2007, Baas up-Pe e sen
2011, K is ensen e al.
2011
Finland Many la ge-scale
p ojec s aiming a
e u ning he elemen s
o p is ine o es s
h ough dis u bances,
which igge na u al
succession
Many la ge-scale
p ojec s aiming a
e u ning pea land
p ocesses and
ege a ion succession
h ough aising he
wa e able
Hund eds o p ojec s
a ying in size aiming
a e u ning he bio a
h ough manipula ions
o s eam s uc u e and
imp o emen o
chemical condi ions
Some single
p ojec s aiming a
ixing de e io a ed
si es and wo n ails
in ou is a eas
Hund eds o small
p ojec s aiming a
keeping he
landscape open
h ough g azing and
mowing, which
p e en s na u al
succession
Raa ikainen 2009,
Similä and Junninen
2011, Finnish Wa e
Res o a ion S a egy
G oup 2012, Aapala e
al. 2013
Iceland One la ge and many
small p ojec s aiming
a igge ing
successional p ocesses;
na i e bi ch and
willows a e some imes
plan ed in clus e s o
es ablishing seed
sou ce
Few small p ojec s
aiming a es o ing
we land unc ion and
s uc u e by aising
he wa e able
Few small sca e ed
p ojec s aiming a
e u ning he bio a
h ough manipula ion
o abio ic ac o s
Nume ous p ojec s
o a ious size
aiming a
accele a ing and
manipula ing
succession
None A ado i and
Halldo sson 2011,
A ado i e al. 2013
No way No egula ac i i y Some single p ojec s,
o en aiming a
es o ing habi a s o
bi ds o amphibians
Liming p og am and
o he mi iga ion e o s
mos ly aiming a
imp o ing condi ion
o anad omous ish
A numbe o small
and a ew la ge
p ojec s, mainly in
low-alpine hea h
aiming a es o ing a
plan co e in
se e ely dis u bed
si es
Many managemen
ini ia i es on
abandoned land
aiming a keeping
he landscape open
by emo ing sh ubs
and ein oduce
g azing and mowing
Moen 1999, Na ud
2001, S e d up-
Thygeson and Bi kemoe
2009, Hagen and
Sk indo 2010
Sweden Sca e ed ac i i ies o
es o e s uc u al and
unc ional
he e ogenei y; some
p ojec s expand a eas
o deciduous o es by
emo ing coni e s o
suppo a e species
Many p ojec s es o e
d ained we lands by
blocking di ches and
es o ing o me
wa e ables
Nume ous p ojec s
e u n boulde s o i e
channels used o
imbe loa ing; o he s
inc ease nu ien
e en ion o educe
leakage
Many ac i i ies o
es o e cul u al
openness by
emo ing sh ubs
and ees
Many small and a
leas one la ge
p ojec aimed a
es o ing e.g., old
pas u eland by
emo ing sh ubs
and ein oduce
g azing and mowing
Lindbo g and E iksson
2004, Lilja e al. 2005,
Jansson e al. 2007,
Malson e al. 2008,
Ga des öm e al. 2013
and on s eams. Cu en ly, no ecological es o a ion p ojec s
a e ca ied ou in he Fa oe Islands (Fosaa and Simonsen 2011).
Finland
In ensi e o es managemen and ene gy p oduc ion a e he
main land use p essu es c ea ing needs o es o a ion in
Finland. Fo es y has led o he agmen a ion and
de e io a ion o o es s and pea lands, and he des uc ion o
he mos e ile pea lands. The lack o decomposing wood and
bu ned a eas, esul ing om o es managemen , h ea ens
o es biodi e si y. In pea lands, d aining and pea ha es ing
cause he g ea es isks o biodi e si y (Rassi e al. 2010).
F eshwa e sys ems a e impac ed mainly by hyd oelec ic
de elopmen and hea y nu ien uno om cons uc ion,
o es y, and ag icul u al a eas (Rassi e al. 2010).
Res o a ion e o s in Finland a e di ec ed p incipally a o es s
and pea lands loca ed in p o ec ed a eas, and in o e g owing
cul u al habi a s ei he on p o ec ed o unp o ec ed land wi h
aluable landscapes (Table 2). Res o a ion o eshwa e
ecosys ems is also ac i e bu can be p oblema ic whe e
neighbo ing a eas con inue o cause nu ien loading.
F eshwa e habi a s a e, howe e , usually no es o ed i his
comp omises ene gy p oduc ion. Mos p e iously ha es ed
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
Table 3. Gene al ou line o socie al ac o s ele an o es o a ion ac i i ies in he No dic coun ies, wi h ocus on he main
elemen s wi hin each ac o . The Fa oe Islands a e no included because he e is no cu en es o a ion ac i i y. The able desc ibes
he cu en bes a ailable knowledge and was compiled using na ional epo s and da abases, oge he wi h o he published da a.
Coun y Ini ia o s/ac o s Main d i e s Land enu e Economy
Denma k Na ional au ho i ies,
municipali ies, p i a e unds,
nongo e nmen al o ganiza ions
(NGOs)
Na ional policy on na u e p o ec ion,
including biodi e si y, habi a , and wa e
amewo k di ec i es
Mainly on s a e-owned land, bu
also some la ge p ojec s on p i a e
land
Mix u e o na ional,
Eu opean Union
(EU), and p i a e
unds
Finland Bo h s a e and local au ho i ies,
such as he Me sähalli us, and
NGOs
Na ional policies on he en i onmen
( o es y, wa e p o ec ion, pollu ion
con ol and con ol o non-na i e species).
EU Habi a Di ec i e and EU Wa e
F amewo k Di ec i e
Mainly on s a e-owned land Mix u e o na ional
and EU unds
Iceland Soil Conse a ion Se ice,
ene gy companies, local
landowne s, and NGOs
Ex ensi e soil e osion and olcanic
ac i i y; go e nmen al policies, pa ly
s imula ed by he Uni ed Na ions
con en ions on clima e change and
biodi e si y
Mix u e o s a e-owned and
p i a e land Mainly na ional
unds, bu some om
indus y (mainly
ene gy companies)
No way S a e and local au ho i ies, and
s akeholde s wi hin hyd opowe
and o he in as uc u e
de elopmen
Go e nmen al policies, legacy like he
Na u e Di e si y Ac , EU Wa e
F amewo k Di ec i e
Mainly on s a e-owned land and
common p ope ies, some small
scale p ojec s on p i a e land
Na ional unds o he
indus y (like ene gy
companies)
Sweden S a e and local au ho i ies, such
as Na ional Boa d o Fo es y,
municipali ies, and NGOs
Na ional policies on he en i onmen (on
o es y, wa e p o ec ion, pollu ion
con ol and con ol o non-na i e species);
EU Habi a Di ec i e and EU Wa e
F amewo k Di ec i e
Mainly on s a e-owned land Mix u e o na ional
and EU unds
pea lands ha e no been es o ed bu ins ead ha e been
a o es ed. Bo h s a e and local au ho i ies a e in ol ed in
es o a ion, and EU LIFE unding is c ucial o la ge-scale
p ojec s (Table 3). The la ges es o a ion p ojec in Finland
cu en ly is Bo eal Pea land Li e, and i aims a es o ing nea ly
43 km2 o a ious kinds o pea lands in 54 Na u a 2000
p o ec ion a eas a ound Finland.
Iceland
Ag icul u e, o es y, and in as uc u e de elopmen a e he
majo land use p essu es in Iceland. The onse o
an h opogenic in luences ollowing he se lemen o Iceland
in he nin h cen u y, combined wi h a ha sh clima e, olcanic
soils, and agile ecosys ems, led o ca as ophic ecosys em
deg ada ion and soil e osion, and he loss o mo e han 95%
o na i e bi ch woodlands (A ado i and A nalds 2001,
A nalds e al. 2001, Gisladó i e al. 2010). Du ing he 20 h
cen u y, mo e han hal o he na u al we lands in Iceland’s
lowland a eas we e d ained o ag icul u al pu poses
(Óska sson 1998), and he woodland emnan s we e u he
agmen ed by he plan ing o exo ic ees (Blöndal and
Gunna sson 1999). Rese oi s associa ed wi h hyd opowe
plan s ha e dis u bed many ca chmen s, and powe lines a e
widesp ead (A nalds and A adó i 2011). Fu he mo e, he
use o in asi e exo ic species in e ege a ion ac i i ies and
o es y poses a isk o na i e ecosys ems (Magnusson 2010).
Mos es o a ion ac i i ies in Iceland in ol e e ege a ion o
e oded land, which mos o en esul s in he es o a ion o
g asslands, hea hlands, o woodlands (Table 2). Some we land
es o a ion occu s bu is limi ed compa ed o he ex ensi e
d ainage o we lands (A adó i and Halldó sson 2011). Mos
ecological es o a ion has been ini ia ed by s a e agencies,
especially he Soil Conse a ion Se ice o Iceland, bu ene gy
companies, local landowne s, and NGOs ha e also been
impo an ac o s in es o a ion (Table 3). The cu en la ges
ecological es o a ion p ojec in Iceland is he Hekluskoga
p ojec , which co e s app oxima ely 900 km2 (nea ly 1% o
Iceland); i aims a es o ing he na i e bi ch woodland and
sh ubland a ound he olcano M . Hekla (A ado i 2007).
No way
Fo es y and ecological changes in abandoned land a e s iking
land use ea u es in No way, bu he loss o wilde ness, and
land use con lic s ela ed o hyd opowe and o he
in as uc u e de elopmen s a e becoming mo e p ominen
(Taugbøl e al. 2001, B yn e al. 2013, Di ec o a e o Na u e
Managemen 2012, S a is ics No way 2012). Non-na i e
species a e p esen in all habi a s, and some o hem ha e
nega i e e ec s on biodi e si y, like modi ying a e na u e
ypes and supp essing na i e species (Gede aas e al. 2012).
Un il he las wo decades, eclama ion ac i i ies in No way
we e es ic ed o p ac ical measu es such as seeding spoil
heaps and oadsides (Hagen and Sk indo 2010, Rydg en e al.
2011). The e is, howe e , a g owing in e es in ecological
es o a ion in di e en habi a s (Table 2), and close
coope a ion be ween managemen au ho i ies, public

Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
agencies, scien is s, and p ac i ione s is o en he si ua ion o
No wegian es o a ion ac i i ies (Hagen and Sk indo 2010).
Mos p ojec s a e small and no pa o any la ge policy o
s a egic plan, bu new legisla ion acknowledges he use o
ecological es o a ion in na u e managemen (Table 3). The
cu en la ges ecological es o a ion p ojec in No way is he
es o a ion o a moun ain mili a y aining a ea (Ma insen and
Hagen 2010, Hagen and E ju 2013).
Sweden
The cu en main land use p essu es in Sweden include
o es y, ag icul u e, and ene gy p oduc ion. Res o a ion
e o s a e di ec ed p ima ily a ecosys ems whe e p e ailing
land use ypes ha e been abandoned, and o ecosys ems whe e
cu en land use causes side e ec s ha h ea en o he sys ems.
In he o me ca ego y, majo es o a ion e o s a e di ec ed
a ee- lowing i e s ha we e p e iously channelized o
imbe loa ing, a d ained we lands wi h poo wood
p oduc ion, and a o e g owing pas u es (Table 2). The second
ca ego y includes p ojec s such as he Kä linge Ri e p ojec ,
whe e he i e ca chmen has been illed wi h small e en ion
impoundmen s o educe nu ien leakage in o a eas
downs eam (Lindahl and Söde q is 2004). In in ensi ely
used sys ems, such as p oduc ion o es s and hyd oelec ic
i e s, es o a ion is es ic ed because o he di icul ies in
combining p oduc ion wi h es o a ion measu es. Fo es
landscapes include examples o es o a ion ac i i ies o
ein oduce unc ional and s uc u al he e ogenei y, in some
cases igge ed by a emp s o suppo popula ions o
h ea ened species, such as he Whi e-backed Woodpecke
(Dend ocopos leuco os) (Robe ge e al. 2008). In
hyd oelec ic i e s, acili a ion o ish mig a ion is a majo
conce n, al hough he e a e ew eal-wo ld examples. The
es o a ion ac i i ies in Sweden a e unded bo h by s a e and
p i a e bodies, and EU unding has made i possible o also
accomplish e y la ge p ojec s (Table 3).
ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION AMONG
COUNTRIES
Land use p essu e as a d i e o ecological es o a ion
The la ge a ia ion in en i onmen al condi ions among he
No dic coun ies explains mos o he di e ences in land use
his o y wi hin he egion, and con ibu es o di e ences in he
ype and ex en o es o a ion. Denma k has e ile soils and
he mos a o able clima e o ag icul u e, and i s physical
geog aphy is compa able wi h neighbo ing Cen al Eu opean
coun ies. On he o he hand, Iceland’s ha sh clima e and
olcanism cause ulne able ecological condi ions ha a e
unique in Eu ope. The a ia ion in popula ion densi y is
concu en wi h his geog aphic g adien , anging om h ee
inhabi an s pe squa e kilome e in Iceland o 127 in Denma k
(Table 1).
In all coun ies, he main land use p essu e is ela ed o he
dominan habi a s. Bo eal o es s domina e Finland and
Sweden, and he highes land use p essu es in bo h coun ies
a e ela ed o o es y, which a ec s o es s, pea lands, and
i e s. This is e lec ed in he ongoing es o a ion e o s in
Finland, whe e es o a ion o o es s and pea lands is
emphasized. S eams and i e s and o he eshwa e sys ems
ecei e he mos es o a ion e o s in Sweden, and his ocus
ela es o changes in he o es y indus y, as he ansi ion
om imbe loa ing o imbe anspo by ucks made i e s
and s eams ha we e no de eloped o hyd opowe a ailable
o es o a ion (Nilsson e al. 2005). Hea hland and g assland
a e cu en ly he dominan habi a ypes in Iceland, whe e mos
o he o es s ha e been des oyed. The highes land use
p essu e comes om o e g azing, which, in combina ion wi h
geog aphic ac o s, has esul ed in ex ensi e dese ed a eas
(A nalds e al. 2001). Thus, he e o s and scale o ecological
es o a ion o e oded land in Iceland ha e been la ge han in
any o he No dic coun y, mo e in line wi h he scale and
s a egies o es o a ion in he No h Ame ican p ai ies and
he Aus alian g asslands (P obe e al. 2005, Mab y e al.
2010). No way alls be ween he o he coun ies, wi h a la ge
ange o habi a ypes, in e media e land use p essu es, and
eme ging, bu limi ed, es o a ion ac i i y wi hin mos
habi a s. Low popula ion densi y and emo e wilde ness a eas
ha e pa ly diminished land use p essu e in No way, al hough
echnological and economic de elopmen s a e cu en ly
pu ing p essu e on all habi a s, hus inc easing he need o
ecological es o a ion (Hagen and Sk indo 2010). In con as ,
all habi a s in Denma k ha e a s ong cul u al componen . This
is e lec ed in he es o a ion ac i i ies ha ocus on land
o me ly used o ag icul u e (Table 2), which has much in
common wi h ongoing es o a ion ac i i ies in he
Ne he lands, UK, and Ge many (Madgwick and Jones 2002).
Res o a ion ac i i ies in some habi a ypes a e limi ed despi e
high land use p essu es and deg ada ion. Fo example, we land
es o a ion has had low p io i y in Iceland, despi e high
p essu e on his habi a ype in he la e pa o he 20 h cen u y
(Halldó sson e al. 2011, Hallsdó i e al. 2012). Likewise, no
es o a ion is ca ied ou in hea hland o g assland habi a s in
he Fa oe Islands, e en hough o e g azing is he mos in ense
land use p essu e causing deg ada ion o hese habi a s (Fosaa
and Simonsen 2011). This indica es ha ac o s o he han land
use p essu e in luence how much e o is pu in o es o a ion
in he No dic coun ies.
Habi a es o a ion
Ecological es o a ion p ojec s in he No dic coun ies a y
bo h in con ex and ac i i ies due o a ia ion in ecological
condi ions, ege a ion zones, ecosys em p essu es, and
popula ion densi ies. In spi e o his, es o a ion ac i i ies
wi hin speci ic habi a s, such as o es s and we lands, a e
ela i ely simila ac oss he egion (Table 2).
Fo es es o a ion, independen o he p essu e and he le el
o o es des uc ion in di e en coun ies, appea s o be done
wi h an aim o in luencing he di ec ion and speed o
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
succession (sensu Walke and del Mo al 2003). Comme cial
o es y has deg aded and agmen ed he bo eal o es s in
Finland, No way, and Sweden, bu mos o hei s uc u e and
dynamics migh e en ually eco e , gi en enough ime.
Res o a ion speeds up na u al succession in e es ial habi a s
(e.g., Walke and del Mo al 2009), and na u al dis u bances
in o es s a e imi a ed by using con olled i e, small clea ings,
s o m simula ion, and ee damage, which igge he
successional ajec o ies (Kuulu ainen e al. 2002). Plan ing
o in oduced species has s ongly in luenced signi ican pa s
o Denma k’s o es ecosys ems (La sen 2012), which has
made he ein oduc ion o na i e species, such as beech, an
essen ial es o a ion componen . The same easoning applies
o deg aded woodlands in Iceland ha a e below he h eshold
o na u al eco e y (A ado i and Eys einsson 2005). The e,
bi ch (Be ula pubescens) and na i e willows (e.g., Salix
phylici olia and S. lana a) a e ein oduced by plan ing o
seeding, p eceded by eclama ion o su ace s abiliza ion
when equi ed (A ado i and Eys einsson 2005, Oska sson e
al. 2006, A ado i 2007), which p omo es ansi ion be ween
successional s ages, and as e eco e y.
Res o a ion o we land and eshwa e habi a s is conduc ed
p ima ily by es o ing he physical and chemical s uc u e, and
allowing o ganisms o colonize la e (Table 2). We land
es o a ion elies on ec ea ing he hyd ological egime in i s
p edis u bance s a e o aid he eco e y o a ibu es such as
decomposi ion a e, pea e o ma ion, and species
assemblages (e.g., Laine e al. 2011). The EU Wa e
F amewo k Di ec i e, which pushes o good ecological and
chemical s a us in su ace wa e s (Heiskanen e al. 2004),
makes es o a ion o abio ic condi ions a p ima y ask
(Jungwi h e al. 2002).
S a egies o es o ing hea hland and g assland a y among
coun ies mo e han o any o he habi a . This a iabili y can
pa ly be explained by he di e se en i onmen al condi ions
o hea hland, which ange om a c ic-alpine hea h ege a ion
in no he n and moun ain a eas o No way, Sweden, and
Finland o lowland cul u al hea hland in Denma k and he wes
coas o No way. Seeding, plan ing, and e ilizing a e used
o accele a e he succession o deg aded hea hland and
g assland communi ies in Finland, No way, and Iceland
(G e a sdó i e al. 2004, Hagen and E ju 2013). In No way,
he e a e examples o hea hland es o a ion wi hou he
addi ion o plan s o seeds, such as he emo al o oads and
o he in as uc u es, and he es o a ion o physical condi ions
in he landscape (e.g., Ma insen and Hagen 2010).
Simila i ies in he en i onmen al cons ain s and a es a which
ce ain habi a ypes can egene a e wi hin hese no he n
habi a s may explain why he same me hods o echniques
we e applied in ce ain habi a s, ega dless o coun y.
Al e na i e explana ions could be ha habi a s ha e
his o ically been used in simila ways and hus p o ide
common challenges o es o a ion ac oss coun ies, o ha
only limi ed es o a ion ools a e a ailable o a gi en habi a .
Simila i ies wi hin habi a s, independen o coun y, indica e
ha he es o a ion s a egy is d i en by he ype o ecosys em
o habi a ha is being es o ed.
Res o a ion o na u al s. cul u al habi a s
An impo an aspec ha a ies among he No dic coun ies
is he p opo ion o “na u al” s. cul u al habi a s. While
Denma k has a la ge p opo ion o cul u al habi a s
cha ac e ized by in ensi e managemen , o he a eas,
especially he no he n pa s o Finland, No way, and Sweden,
ha e ex ensi e nea ly p is ine land. These ci cums ances
clea ly a ec he aim and design o ecological es o a ion.
Whe e he cu en land use p essu e is low and habi a s a e
nea ly na u al, es o a ion can s i e owa d eaching a na u al
s a e. In a eas wi h a long cul u al his o y, on he o he hand,
such a ge s a e usually un ealis ic and no e en conside ed.
Na u al successional ajec o ies a e gene ally no accep ed in
cul u al landscapes, and ecological es o a ion equi es
con inuous managemen o main ain hei alues. Thus,
es o a ion o en has he objec i e o ec ea ing o me cul u al
s a es ha ha e desi able alues. Such es o a ion o en
equi es con inuous managemen o a o speci ic
biodi e si y, as in he es o a ion o g asslands ha a e g azed
o scy hed. In he No dic coun ies, he mos no able examples
a e he Danish and No wegian cul u al hea hlands, which a e
main ained as a pa o cul u al he i age by egula
managemen , including bu ning, mowing, g azing, and
emo al o colonizing ees (Webb 1998, No de haug and
Johansen 2011).
Policy, legisla ion, and economy behind ecological
es o a ion
Technological and economic de elopmen s ha e caused la ge
changes in socie ies and land use. Oppo uni ies o ecological
es o a ion ha e a isen ollowing he a ailabili y o p e iously
occupied land due o a mland abandonmen o educed
emphasis on adi ional a ming ac i i ies (e.g., A ado i and
Eys einsson 2005, Madsen e al. 2005), he hal ing o log
loa ing on i e s (Nilsson e al. 2005), he eloca ion o
mili a y p ac ice anges (Hagen and E ju 2013), o o he land
use changes.
The a ailabili y o land o ecological es o a ion seems o be
linked o economic de elopmen . This can be associa ed wi h
dec eased p o i abili y o o me land use in an a ea, which
p o ides an oppo uni y o es o a ion o a mo e na u al s a e
(Bossuy e al. 2001) o c ea ion o new habi a ypes (Milg om
2008). Hyd opowe p oduc ion has conside able economic
impo ance, and i e s used o his pu pose a e usually no
a ailable o ecological es o a ion unless powe s a ions a e
in need o eno a ion o i pe missions a e e mina ed; in he
la e cases, e en dam emo al can be possible (Lejon e al.
2009, Jø gensen and Renö äl 2013). Simila ly, la ge pea land
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
a eas we e d ained in Finland in o de o p oduce imbe , bu
unsa is ac o y esul s ha e gene a ed discussions abou
pea land es o a ion also ou side o p o ec ed a eas (Minis y
o Ag icul u e 2011). E en on hea ily deg aded land,
unsus ainable use may be a o ed o e ecological es o a ion
i impo an s akeholde s ega d he a ea as socially o
economically impo an , as is he case o many highland
commons o Iceland ha a e used o sheep g azing (A nalds
and Ba ka son 2003). The same applies o in ensi e
ag icul u e on ma ginal soils in Denma k, Finland, and
Sweden, whe e he p o i abili y elies on subsidies om he
EU o he go e nmen al subsidies o building imbe oads
o access o es y in emo e a eas in No way (B u oll e al.
2011). Va ious incen i es, including mone a y ones, a e o en
he mos e ec i e d i e s o ecological es o a ion (de G oo
e al. 2007, McGhee e al. 2007).
Mos o he No dic coun ies ha e laws and policies ha
encou age es o a ion, di ec ly o indi ec ly, such as
go e nmen al suppo o es o e p io i ized habi a s in
Denma k h p://2.na u e h e . m.dk/na u -_og_miljoep ojek e .
aspx?ID=65019), he Swedish En i onmen al Objec i es
(h p://www.miljomal.nu/Global/24_las_me /b oschy e /Swedens-
en i onmen al-objec i es.pd ), legisla ion on na u e conse a ion
in Finland (Finland’s Na u e Conse a ion Ac 1996) and
No way (Na u e Di e si y Ac 2009), and legisla ion on soil
conse a ion in Iceland (Soil Conse a ion Ac 1965).
Inc eased emphasis on ecological es o a ion in in e na ional
policies (e.g., Bullock e al. 2011) has in luenced na ional
policies in he No dic coun ies. In Denma k, Finland, and
Sweden, much es o a ion is made possible by he EU’s LIFE-
unded es o a ion p ojec s. This accoun s o he well-
o ganized o es and pea land es o a ion in Finland, while
eshwa e es o a ion in he coun y has ecei ed less EU
LIFE unding and comp ises nume ous small-scale p ojec s
ha use di e en s a egies (Table 2). In addi ion, managemen
in o de o imp o e so-called a o able ecological condi ion
a he han s ic ecological es o a ion is also impo an
(Mo sing e al. 2013).
New incen i es, such as he Aichi a ge s o he Con en ion
on Biological Di e si y’s 2011–2020 s a egic plan (h p://
www.cbd.in /sp/), ha e he po en ial o a ec na ional policy
and p omo e es o a ion ac i i y in he coming yea s. Ca bon
seques a ion in soils and ege a ion as a mi iga ion ac ion
unde he Uni ed Na ions F amewo k Con en ion on Clima e
Change has been one o he d i e s o e ege a ion and
e o es a ion in Iceland since he la e 1990s (A nalds 2004).
Recen ly, i has also been shown o be a d i e o we land
es o a ion (Icelandic Minis y o he En i onmen 2007). On
he o he hand, ee plan a ion p og ams aimed solely a ca bon
seques a ion may coun e ac es o a ion i hey ely on exo ic
species (c . Lindenmaye e al. 2012). EU policies such as he
EU Habi a Di ec i e and EU Wa e F amewo k Di ec i e
ha e been d i e s o ecological es o a ion in Denma k,
Finland, and Sweden h ough he LIFE p og am (e.g., Jones
e al. 2007, Sil a e al. 2007, Ga des öm e al. 2013, Mo sing
e al. 2013). No way and Iceland ha e no app o ed he EU
Habi a Di ec i e and do no pa icipa e in he LIFE p og am,
bu he EU Wa e F amewo k Di ec i e has ne e heless
become a d i e o i e es o a ion in No way (h p://www.
annpo alen.no/).
Mos es o a ion p ojec s in he No dic coun ies ake place
on public and s a e-owned land (Table 3). P ojec s on p i a e
land end o be smalle (A adó i and Halldó sson 2011),
al hough he e a e examples o la ge es o a ion p ojec s on
p i a e land, like he Filsø es o a ion in Denma k (h p://
www.a j .dk/na u / ilso/). Expe iences om all he coun ies
indica e ha landowne s a e s ongly d i en by mone a y
incen i es (METSO 2008, A adó i e al. 2013), bu o he
incen i es, such as he p o ision o ma e ials o ca ying ou
he es o a ion, educa ion, and ex ension se ices, a e also
impo an d i e s (A nalds 2004, Ska phéðinsson 2011).
Mone a y incen i es can, howe e , also coun e ac ecological
es o a ion i hey und ac ions ha compe e wi h ecological
es o a ion (Schuy 2005). Examples include egional a m
a o es a ion p ojec s in Iceland ha emphasize imbe
p oduc ion wi h exo ic species (A ado i and Eys einsson
2005), and seeding o alpine spoil heaps wi h comme cial seed
mix u es in No way and Sweden (Rydg en e al. 2011).
Na ional and local au ho i ies and agencies s ongly in luence
land use and de elopmen p ocesses in all he No dic
coun ies, and a e he e o e impo an ac o s in es o a ion.
Public p esence in ecological es o a ion is also s ong.
Fa me s, who mos o en a e p i a e landowne s, play an
impo an ole in ecological es o a ion in Iceland h ough he
p ojec “Fa me s Heal he Land,” in which app oxima ely 20%
o he na ion’s sheep a me s pa icipa e (A nalds 2005,
Pé u sdó i 2011). Howe e , he a me s o en ocus on
ecosys em se ices, such as g azing, p e en ion o soil
e osion, o imp o ed p oduc i i y. P i a e companies o
landowne s migh also p omo e hei own p ojec s based on
p i a e in ol emen o special in e es s, which in his sense is
compa able wi h engagemen om NGOs. As obse ed in
o he egions, NGOs ha e a ole in ad oca ing es o a ion ( o
example, McGhee e al. 2007), especially in we lands and
eshwa e habi a s. In a ecen example, NGOs bough
aluable na u e a eas in Denma k in o de o p o ec and es o e
na u e alues (h p://www.danma ksna u ond.dk/De aul .
aspx?ID=3821). The in ol emen o NGOs seems o be
s onge in p ojec s wi h a clea and engaging aim, like sa ing
bi ds o e-es ablishing bi d habi a s, and such p ojec s a e
o en ca ied ou in close coope a ion wi h, o ecei e
mone a y suppo om, public au ho i ies (Ma insen and
Vedum 2010).
Ecology and Socie y 18(4): 34
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol18/iss4/a 34/
THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE: AN
INTERNATIONAL APPROACH TO ECOLOGICAL
RESTORATION
Wi h inc easing an h opogenic p essu es on he wo ld’s
ecosys ems, ecological es o a ion has become mo e
impo an han e e . In a ecen e iew, Suding (2011) asks
whe he he young discipline o es o a ion ecology is eady
o he e a o es o a ion, and emphasizes he need o
e alua ing he success o es o a ion p ojec s. Ou analysis
ocused on achie ing an o e iew o he ex en , ypes, and
d i e s o ecological es o a ion ca ied ou in he No dic
coun ies. We ha e no included an analysis o he ou comes,
i.e., successes and ailu es o es o a ion p ojec s in he egion;
howe e , such analysis is needed, and ou s udy p o ides a
basis o i .
Ou in e na ional app oach o e s new pe spec i es o
unde s anding, planning, and implemen ing ecological
es o a ion. We ha e ound ha di e ences among coun ies
in ac o s such as geog aphy, land use, policy, legisla ion, and
economy ha e os e ed di e ences in he ex en and emphasis
o ecological es o a ion. In o he wo ds, hese di e ences
de e mine i , when, and whe e o do es o a ion. One impo an
inding is ha he unding o es o a ion p ojec s by he EU
has gi en Denma k, Finland, and Sweden new oppo uni ies
o inc ease he impac o es o a ion compa ed o he o he
No dic coun ies. LIFE- unded p ojec s ha e o en g ea e
han coun y-le el impac s, as hey a e e alua ed agains EU
en i onmen al policy objec i es. EU-le el e alua ion
inc eases he quali y o he p ojec s, and since a signi ican
sha e o p ojec unding has o be used o dissemina ing and
communica ing p ojec ou comes, expe iences and good
p ac ice sp ead o e a wide a ea ac oss and beyond he EU.
We ha e also ound ha , despi e na ional di e ences,
es o a ion me hods, o how es o a ion is done, can be
analogous, al hough no necessa ily iden ical, a he habi a
le el, i espec i e o coun y. These esul s indica e a
combina ion o bo h local habi a -speci ic solu ions and
in e na ional in luences.
Many au ho s ha e emphasized he need o in e na ional
coope a ion in ecological es o a ion (e.g., Beklioglu e al.
2007, S e ens 2008, Lü e al. 2011). Fu he mo e, links and
inc easing communica ion be ween scien is s ac oss
disciplines and p ac i ione s a e needed (Ei zel e al. 2012).
To imp o e he egional de elopmen o ecological
es o a ion, we ad oca e o inc eased coope a ion and
knowledge sha ing ac oss disciplines and among coun ies,
bo h in he No dic coun ies and in e na ionally. An ob ious
ad an age o such coope a ion is ha in o ma ion and
expe iences om a wide ange o habi a s become a ailable
and hus p o ide a mo e solid basis o de eloping p ac ical
solu ions o es o a ion me hods and policies. The le el o
in e en ion equi ed in es o a ion a ies and depends on local
condi ions and scale (Hobbs and C ame 2008). A p esen ,
handbooks and guidelines on bes p ac ice es o a ion me hods
a e p epa ed sepa a ely in each o he No dic coun ies (Table
2). Join elabo a ion o p ojec designs and echniques, and
e alua ion o es o a ion ou comes can p o ide unde s anding,
planning, and implemen a ion o ecological es o a ion on
habi a le el ac oss bo de s.
Socio-economic expe iences can also be sha ed. C oss-
compa ison o simila i ies and di e ences wi hin g oups o
coun ies will mos likely gi e new insigh in o p ocesses and
mechanisms o ele ance o di e en s ages o policy-making
(Bake and Ecke be g 2013). Con inuous discussion is needed
be ween scien is s, decision-make s, and he gene al public,
on a na ional and in e na ional le el, conce ning he needs and
a ge s ela ed o land use and es o a ion. In o ma ion on he
ecological, social, and economic impac s o land use and he
needs o habi a es o a ion can be used by decision-make s
when se ing a ge s and objec i es conce ning ecological
es o a ion. Join iden i ica ion o es o a ion p io i ies will be
aluable, e.g., a No dic agenda o ecological es o a ion
aimed a loca ing es o a ion e o s o habi a s and egions
whe e hey a e mos use ul, in e ms o ecological as well as
social aspec s.
Responses o his a icle can be ead online a :
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/issues/ esponses.
php/5891
Acknowledgmen s:
This pape is a p oduc o a No dic ne wo k “Res o a ion o
Damaged Ecosys ems in he No dic Coun ies (ReNo)” unded
by he No dic Council o Minis e s du ing 2009–2011. We
hank Ka i Si e sen, No wegian Ins i u e o Na u e
Resea ch, o d awing Figu e 1, Sco Wilson o eading and
commen ing on he manusc ip , and an anonymous e iewe
o aluable commen s on a p e ious e sion.
LITERATURE CITED
Aapala, K., M. Similä, and J. Pen inen, edi o s. 2013.
Oji e ujen soiden ennallis amisopas. (Abs ac in English:
Handbook o he es o a ion o d ained pea lands).
Me sähalli us Na u al He i age Se ices, Se ies B.
A ado i , A. L. 2007. Res o a ion o bi ch and willow
woodland on e oded a eas. Pages 67–74 in G. Halldo sson, E.
S. Oddsdo i , and O. Egge sson, edi o s. E ec s o
a o es a ion on ecosys ems, landscape and u al
de elopmen . Reykhol , Iceland, June 18–22, 2005.
TemaNo d 2007:508. [online] URL: h p://ep in s.uls e .ac.
uk/14798/1/AFFORNORD_Con e ence.pd