Ecological and social dimensions of ecosystem restoration in the Nordic countries

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