1. BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICE INDICATORS IN FINLAND
Ari-Pekka Auvinen Finnish Environment Institute
2016 Eionet Workshop | NRCs Biodiversity, Ecosystems, Indicators and Assessments
30 June - 1 July 2016, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

2. Myself
Researcher, Finnish Environment Institute, Oulu, 2004–
Head of the conservation committee,
Northern Ostrobothnian Ornitological Society, 2008 –
Photographer, graphic designer, journalist…
… and the team
Laura Mononen, Researcher, PhD student, Joensuu
Petteri Vihervaara, Senior Research Scientist, Askainen

3. How did it all happen?
What’s good, what’s bad?
What lies ahead?

4. Environmental Cluster Programme for indicator development
Evaluation of the Finnish National Biodiversity Action Plan 1997–2005
Professor Heikki Toivonen works at the CBD Secretariat 2001–2002
Background study for indicator development in Finland
The second National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2006–2016
Fourth country report to CBD

5. Monitoring pages for the 3rd NBSAP
Official lauching of web sites Feb 19th 2010
Mid-term review of the 3rd NBSAP
Project for the development of national ecosystem service indicators
2012–2015
The third National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2013–2020
Fifth country report to CBD

6. THREE MAIN PRINCIPLES OF
1. COOPERATION
- aiming to involve all relevant actors
2. TRANSPARENCY
- development open to review at all stages
- all data published on the web
3. INDEPENDENCE
- a shared platform belonging to all data providers

7. X BIODIVERSITY INDICATORS FORESTS MIRES BALTIC SEA INLAND WATERS
FARMLANDS
ALPINE HABITATS
URBAN AREAS
SHORES
ROCKY HABITATS & ESKERS
INVASIVE SPECIES
CLIMATE CHANGE X

8. Rocky and esker habitats
NUMBER OF BIODIVERSITY.FI
(MISSING INDICATORS IN BRACKETS)
Forests
Mires
Baltic Sea
Inland waters
Farmlands
Alpine habitats
Urban habitats
Shores
Rocky and esker habitats
Climate change
Pressures 5 4 3
1 (1)
(3)
(2)
State
5 (2)
4 (1) 6
2 (3)
1 (3) 1
(5)
Impacts
(4)
Resposes
3 (1)
1 (2)
2 (1)
Total
18 (2)
15 (2)
15 (1)
12 (5) 17
10 (4)
4 (2)
5 (5)
(11)
(14)
>> 96 (46)

9. FO10 Forest birds

10. AL4 State of lichen pastures

11. SH7 Red-listed shore habitat types

12. INTERPRETATION
”Neutral” matter-of-fact presentation or explicit interpretation?
>> expert groups check data, presentation and discuss interpretation
E.g. farmland experts:
Mikko Kuussaari
Finnish Environment Institute
General expert
Juha Helenius
University of Helsinki
Tarja Kortesmaa
Tike (Agricultural Information Centre)
Agricultural statistics
Tapio Salo
MTT Agrifood Research Finland
Nutrients
Sari Autio
Pesticides
Reija Hietala
University of Turku
Agricultural landscape
Katja Raatikainen
Metsähallitus (Forest and Park Service)
Traditional rural biotopes
Ville Vepsäläinen
Finnish Museum of Natural History
Birds
Janne Heliölä
Butterflies
Terho Hyvönen
Weeds
Juha Pykälä
Red-listed species and habitats
Eero Pehkonen
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
Agricultural policies

13. GOOD:
indicators systematically used since the fourth country report
> away from ”politically motivated” reporting
some indicators are semi-automatically updated & some new indicators have been developed since 2010
experts have been willing, even enthusiastic to participate
indicators widely accepted

14. BAD:
plenty of ”slapping on the back”, but insuffient funding (0– € per year)
constantly lagging behind the updating schedule
some monitoring schemes under threat due to budget cuts
no resources for mainstreaming and publicity
expert groups do not meet annually

15. CICES x CASCADE ECOSYSTEM SERVICE INDICATORS
national perspective: what are the most important ecosystem services in Finland at the moment?
consultation of the biodiversity indicator expert groups and interest groups

21. GOOD:
has helped in getting a grip on ecosystem services & making the issues more concrete
exciting work because of novelty
expert cooperation has worked well again
national MAES now taking steps forward
BAD:
one-time development project: the framework now exists, but real content is often lacking
coordination between es-related projects often loose
political will for implementation not too strong

22. WHAT LIES AHEAD?
the need to monitor biodiversity and ecosystem services never goes away
2020 is coming
how far will MAES get us?
what happens with green accounting and green GDP?
what is the role of companies (e.g. ecological compensation and implementing the es-framework)?

23. … AND NOW GO TO WWW.BIODIVERSITY.FI
THANK YOU!