Harmonization of protected forest area classifications in Europe

European protected forest area classifications have now been harmonized. A scientifically analysed and justified database has been created for forest protection in nearly 30 European countries. This means that the protection situation in different countries can be compared. It appeared that Finland has the strictest definition of protection. The results of four years of work were presented at a conference in Barcelona at the end of February The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe that will be held in Warsaw in 2007 will announce protection data collected according to the new classification

A key objective of COST E27, which is financed by the European Union, was to harmonize protected forest area classifications in Europe so that information reported by different countries is comparable. The director of the Joensuu Research Centre, Jari Parviainen, who is vice-chairman of COST E27, admits that harmonizing classifications was hard work, since forest protection traditions and models in different countries vary a great deal. Putting classifications into practice also proved difficult. "The process was complicated by large differences in defining and classifying forest areas. For example, in some countries the commercial use of forests has been allowed in protected areas. Extensive forest areas have also been protected for different reasons - to protect forest biodiversity, to preserve the landscape or to prevent erosion," Parviainen says. In Parviainen's opinion this type of protection for different reasons cannot be compared to the situation in Finland, where biodiversity is the only criterion that counts. Finland has the strictest definition of protection When forest protection measures in 27 countries were compared, the Finnish model stood out as an example for others. "According to analyses Finland has the strictest definition of protection. The difference was biggest when Finnish forest protection practice was compared with other European countries, where forests in the same protection category have had considerably different operating models," Mr Parviainen says. Strictly protected forests account for 4.1 per cent of productive forest land in Finland. This is slightly higher than the figure in Sweden and is in fact the highest in Europe. Total strictly protected forest land area, including less productive forests, is as high as 7.2 per cent. Strictly protected forests in Finland as well as Sweden are located mainly in the north. Elsewhere in Europe the largest protected areas are likewise in remote regions and in mountains. Southern Finland also has more strictly protected forest than countries in continental Europe. Cooperation between experts and researchers Experts in different countries performed the actual definition work. Nature organizations did not participate in this. Representatives of the WWF and IUCN were heard, however. "COST E27 is the result of scientific cooperation between forest and environment experts in European countries. The European classification takes into consideration the long use and fragmented ownership of forests in Europe. In other parts of the world, where the state owns the bulk of forest land, other classifications are in use," Parviainen describes. Mr Parviainen, who chaired COST E4 in 1996-2000, points out that forestry, has been going on for 300-400 years in central Europe as well as Scandinavia. "Consequently there are no virgin forests in Western Europe. Finland's forests should not be compared to forests in Russia or Canada. Forestry traditions in southern Finland can be compared with central Europe, however." Mr Parviainen is the director of the Joensuu Research Centre, which is part of the Finnish Forest Research Institute. Proper management of multi-use forests supports biodiversity Mr Hannu Valtanen, Director of Forest Policy at the Finnish Forest Industries Federation, is satisfied with researchers' input in harmonizing classifications. "We should be proud of our good forest protection status in Finland. As statistics show, we have more strictly protected forest than any other country in Europe." In Finland the main emphasis should be on measures that can protect biodiversity in multi-use commercial forests, rather than total protection. "Forestry measures in multi-use forests have a great significance for biodiversity since multi-use forests cover a much larger area than strictly protected areas," Mr Valtanen notes. COST E27 = Protected forest areas in Europe IUCN = The World Conservation Union WWF = World Wildlife Union For more information, please contact: Mr Hannu Valtanen, Senior Vice President, Forest Policy, tel. + 358 9 132 6610 + 358 40 515 2766, email: firstname.lastname@forestindustries.fi