<<

Norwegian Ministry Chapter 4–9 of and Environment

Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) for Norway’s national action plan Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) Nature for life Norway’s national biodiversity action plan

Translation from Norwegian. For only. Contents

Summary ...... 5 6 Safeguarding threatened and ...... 43 4 Indirect drivers of biodiversity 6.1 Introduction ...... 43 loss and general framework .... 9 6.2 Safeguarding threatened species . 44 4.1 Introduction ...... 9 6.3 Safeguarding threatened habitats . 47 4.2 The value of 6.4 Safeguarding threatened species and services ...... 10 and habitats in each of Norway’s 4.3 The EEA Agreement, trade and major ...... 49 investment ...... 11 6.4.1 Marine and coastal ...... 49 4.3.1 The EEA Agreement and broader 6.4.2 and ...... 52 cooperation with the EU on 6.4.3 ...... 52 biodiversity ...... 11 6.4.4 Forest ...... 53 4.3.2 Trade and environment ...... 12 6.4.5 Cultural ...... 54 4.3.3 Investments and markets ... 14 6.4.6 Mountains ...... 55 4.4 Development cooperation ...... 17 6.4.7 Polar ecosystems ...... 56 6.5 Genetic resources ...... 56 5 Sustainable use and ecological status in ecosystems 19 7 Conservation of a representative 5.1 Introduction ...... 19 selection of Norwegian nature 58 5.2 The Nature Diversity Act ...... 20 7.1 Introduction ...... 58 5.3 Developing management 7.2 Choice of long-term conservation objectives for good ecological measures ...... 58 status ...... 21 7.3 Protection of areas in each of 5.4 Overall land-use management Norway’s major ecosystems ...... 61 policy ...... 23 7.3.1 Marine and coastal waters ...... 61 5.5 Management policy for each of 7.3.2 Rivers and lakes ...... 61 Norway’s major ecosystems ...... 24 7.3.3 Wetlands ...... 62 5.5.1 Marine and coastal waters ...... 24 7.3.4 Forest ...... 62 5.5.2 Rivers and lakes ...... 29 7.3.5 Cultural landscapes ...... 63 5.5.3 Wetlands ...... 33 7.3.6 Mountains ...... 63 5.5.4 Forest ...... 35 7.3.7 Polar ecosystems ...... 64 5.5.5 Cultural landscapes ...... 36 5.5.6 Mountains ...... 37 8 Improving knowledge on 5.5.7 Polar ecosystems ...... 38 biodiversity ...... 65 5.6 The management plan for the 8.1 Why is knowledge so important? .. 65 Norwegian Sea ...... 39 8.2 Mapping biodiversity and 5.6.1 Introduction ...... 39 establishing maps of ecological 5.6.2 The marine environment – information for Norway ...... 65 ecological status and trends in the 8.3 Monitoring ...... 67 Norwegian Sea ...... 39 8.4 and development and 5.6.3 Patterns of activity and pressures education ...... 68 and impacts associated with 8.5 Traditional knowledge ...... 71 industrial activities ...... 41 8.6 Access to information ...... 73 5.6.4 Value creation and its importance 8.7 Syntheses, risk assessments and for Norwegian society ...... 42 analyses ...... 73 5.6.5 Assessment of towards goals ...... 42 9 Responsibilities of local and 5.6.6 Stakeholder participation ...... 42 regional authorities ...... 75 5.6.7 Further work on the management 9.1 Nature as a resource for Norway’s of the Norwegian Sea ...... 42 municipalities ...... 75 9.2 Land-use planning as an 9.4 The municipal revenue system ..... 78 instrument for biodiversity 9.5 Guidance on integrating management ...... 75 biodiversity into planning 9.2.1 General application of the processes ...... 79 Planning and Building Act ...... 75 9.6 Biodiversity in towns and built-up 9.2.2 Municipal sub-plans for areas ...... 80 biodiversity ...... 76 9.3 Municipal capacity, expertise and commitment ...... 78 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 5 Nature for life

Nature for life Norway’s national biodiversity action plan

Recommendation of 18 December 2015 from the Ministry of Climate and Environment, approved in the Council of State the same day. (Government Solberg)

Summary

Safeguarding biodiversity for and Why do we need a white paper on biodiversity? generations is essential to the success of this The natural is the foundation for life ‘green shift’. The green shift is intended to facili- and livelihoods. A huge variety of species, habitats tate production and consumption patterns that and ecosystems provides us with from have far less negative environmental and climate food and medicines to building materials, opportu- impact than is the case today. Through conserva- nities for outdoor activities and aesthetic and tion and sustainable use, we will seek to maintain spiritual benefits. Pollination, natural flood control the supply of ecosystem goods and services for and CO2 uptake are just a few examples of the the future. variety of ecosystem services that nature pro- vides. Many Norwegian industries are dependent on the environment and natural resources. Nor- Biodiversity under pressure globally and in Norway wegian outdoor traditions developed from peo- In recent decades, human activity has resulted in ple’s close contact with the natural world, and considerable losses of biodiversity and caused have given rise to activities in other sectors, such deterioration of ecological status in many ecosys- as . tems. is adding to the pressure on Norway’s previous white paper on biodiversity ecosystems. Some of the world’s ecosystems are was published 14 years ago. A great deal has hap- under such pressure that they are no longer able pened in the intervening years. The preparation of to provide the goods and services on which peo- a new white paper has been a fresh opportunity to ple depend. look at the challenges we face as regards biodiver- In many ways, the biodiversity situation in sity and the priorities, tools and instruments we Norway is more positive. But here too, there is should use to safeguard biodiversity. work to be done. Land-use conversion and land- use change are vital for society, for example in connection with road construction, housing devel- Biodiversity is essential in the green shift opments and industrial and commercial activities, The Norwegian Government is actively promot- but is also the most important driver of biodiver- ing a transition to a greener Norwegian economy. sity loss in terrestrial ecosystems. acidifica- 6 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life tion, and the spread of alien species are tems. The Government will therefore take steps to other drivers of . Climate change ensure that Norwegian nature is used sustainably, is already affecting Norway’s ecosystems, particu- prevent the loss of species and ecosystems, and larly polar ecosystems, and is expected to have continue efforts for the conservation of a repre- increasingly negative impacts on other ecosys- sentative selection of Norwegian nature. tems as well in future. The Government’s policy for biodiversity man- Healthy ecosystems provide vital goods and agement in Norway can be summarised under the services. Ecosystems consist of many different following main headings: that interact with each other and the 1. More clearly targeted nature management physical environment. Species are the building 2. Climate-resilient nature management blocks of ecosystems. loss or degradation 3. Strengthening municipal expertise on biodi- may threaten species or populations with extinc- versity tion, and the loss of species or populations may 4. Safeguarding threatened species and habitats alter ecosystem functioning. Species that are con- 5. Long-term conservation of a representative sidered to be at risk of extinction are classified as selection of Norwegian nature threatened. In Norway’s latest assessment, 2355 6. Knowledge-based management species have been classified as threatened. This 7. of tools and instruments to the dif- corresponds to 11.3 % of the approximately 21 000 ferent ecosystems species that were assessed.

More clearly targeted nature management National and international targets for biodiversity Decisions are constantly being made that require conservation a balance to be found between biodiversity consid- The Government’s policy is designed to play a erations and other important public interests. part in achieving national and international tar- Overall, the many different decisions that are gets for biodiversity, particularly the Aichi targets made may cause the ecological status of ecosys- under the on Biological Diversity. The tems to deteriorate, which in the long run is Aichi targets are reflected in Norway’s three unsustainable. At present, there is a lack of clear, national biodiversity targets, which are concerned agreed management objectives related to ecologi- with: cal status for several major ecosystems: forests, – achieving good ecological status in ecosys- wetlands, cultural landscapes, mountains, polar tems; ecosystems and to some extent marine waters. – safeguarding threatened species and habitats; The Government will initiate the development of – maintaining a representative selection of Nor- management objectives based on scientific defini- wegian nature (the conservation of areas cov- tions of good ecological status for different eco- ering the whole range of habitats and ecosys- systems. Once this has been done, it will be possi- tems). ble to target the use of policy instruments more The Aichi targets are global in nature but require clearly in order to achieve and maintain the action at national level. Norway’s contributions in desired ecological status. The Government’s pro- this will focus primarily on national action, posals in this area are discussed in Chapter 5.3. but we are part of a globalised economy. We are For rivers and lakes and coastal waters, a system responsible for the environmental pressure Nor- of management objectives has already been estab- wegian activities cause outside the country’s bor- lished through the Management Regula- ders through trade and investment. Norway’s tions. efforts to reduce pressure from Norwegian activi- ties in other countries are therefore an important part of its national policy for biodiversity at global Climate-resilient nature management level. Climate change will become an increasingly important pressure on biodiversity. This will have a number of implications for nature management. Norwegian policy It will be possible to reduce the cumulative envi- The Government takes a long-term approach to ronmental effects by limiting other environmental the management of Norwegian nature. We must pressures. For example, if climate change reduces ensure that future generations also have opportu- the availability of food for certain species so that nities for wealth creation based on healthy ecosys- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 7 Nature for life they produce fewer young, it may be necessary to Government’s policy for threatened species and restrict harvesting of these species. habitats. The Government will assess whether Nor- way’s existing protected areas will be adequate if climate change results in shifts in the geographi- Long-term conservation of a representative selection cal distribution of species. Moreover, the Govern- of Norwegian nature ment will manage Norwegian nature in such a The long-term conservation of a selection of Nor- way that it can play a part in climate change adap- wegian nature has been part of Norway’s policy tation. For example, wetlands can help to moder- for many years. Area-based measures to achieve ate flooding. this include the national plan, county protec- tion plans, the protection plan for , the designation of key forest that are not Strengthening municipal expertise on biodiversity to be felled, and the protection of coral reefs Land conversion and land-use change is the most against fisheries. important driver of biodiversity loss in Norway. The Government will ensure that the value of Since the municipalities have extensive responsi- conservation areas is maintained through sound bilities for land-use management, it is vital that management. The Government will also consider they organise this work in a way that ensures whether the areas concerned are sufficiently rep- sound management of the . resentative of the whole range of Norwegian The Government will provide a framework to nature. The Government will expand the scope of enable the municipalities to build up their exper- voluntary forest protection and continue work on tise on biodiversity. It proposes to achieve this marine protected areas. Some other habitat types, through a sound knowledge base and the provi- particularly in the lowlands, are also poorly repre- sion of better guidance, and by initiating a pilot sented. The Government will initiate county-level project on municipal sub-plans for biodiversity as supplementary protection of areas under the a tool for biodiversity management. The pilot pro- Nature Diversity Act, and will test protection on a ject will focus on biodiversity of national, regional voluntary basis in ecosystems other than forest. and local value. Application of the Marine Resources Act will also Chapter 5.4 discusses the main principles of be considered. Norway’s land-use policy. Chapter 9 deals with the Chapter 7 deals with the Government’s policy responsibilities of local and regional authorities, for conservation of a representative selection of which include responsibility for biodiversity in Norwegian nature. towns and built-up areas.

Knowledge-based management Safeguarding threatened species and habitats One of the principles of Norway’s environmental One of Norway’s national targets is to ensure that policy is that management must be knowledge- no species or habitats are lost as a result of the based. The Government will therefore continue cumulative effects of human activity. Special safe- initiatives to map Norwegian nature and establish guards will continue to apply to threatened spe- maps of ecological information for Norway. The cies and habitats when decisions are made under Government also proposes further development sectoral legislation and in connection with land- of the environmental monitoring system to ensure use planning. Protection of areas under the satisfactory monitoring of all ecosystems, and fur- Nature Diversity Act, priority species and selected ther development of good indicators for pressures habitat types are instruments the Government and ecosystem services. will use to safeguard threatened species and habi- Other forms of knowledge generation, for tats. example research, analyses and syntheses, will The Government’s first priority will be species also be further developed and improved. New edi- that are critically endangered or endangered in tions of the Norwegian Nature Index, red lists and Norway and also have a substantial proportion of ecological risk assessments for alien species will their population in Norway. Some species are criti- be presented regularly. To ensure that decision cally endangered or endangered not only in Nor- makers and the general public have adequate way but also in the rest of or globally. information about what knowledge is available, There is even more urgent to take steps to databases will be improved and coordinated. Envi- safeguard such species. Chapter 6 deals with the 8 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life ronmental data and statistics will be of good qual- The marine management plans and the ity and will be available in public databases. basin management plans are tools for ecosystem- based management of marine and coastal waters and rivers and lakes. Sectoral legislation and the Adaptation of tools and instruments to the different Planning and Building Act are used to regulate ecosystems activities that can put pressure on biodiversity. It Every ecosystem is different. The environmental is a principle of Norwegian environmental policy pressures affecting them vary, and the tools and that each sector is responsible for dealing with instruments used to safeguard them must be pressures and impacts resulting from its own adapted accordingly. The Government’s main activities. Instruments such as priority species, principles for safeguarding biodiversity are the selected habitat types and area-based protection same for all ecosystems, but this white paper sets are relevant in all ecosystems, but can only be out proposals for adapting the use of tools and pol- used out to twelve nautical miles from the baseline icy instruments to different major ecosystems: in sea areas, since this is the limit for the geo- marine and coastal waters, rivers and lakes, wet- graphical scope of the relevant provisions in the lands, forest, cultural landscapes, mountains and Nature Diversity Act. polar ecosystems. These include proposals for achieving or maintaining good ecological status in Note to the reader: Chapter 1–3 describe the need different ecosystems (Chapter 5), safeguarding for a national biodiversity action plan, the state of threatened species and habitats (Chapter 6) and Norway’s ecosystems and achievement of the conservation of a representative selection of Nor- Aichi-targets. These chapters have not been trans- wegian nature (Chapter 7). lated into English. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 9 Nature for life

4 Indirect drivers of biodiversity loss and general framework

4.1 Introduction these environmental challenges are intrinsically linked to our consumption and resource use pat- The loss of biodiversity must be considered from terns. And thirdly, they are closely interwoven, so both a global and a national perspective. Pres- that the existence of one environmental problem sures on some of the world’s ecosystems are hav- may exacerbate the effects of others. Their evolu- ing such serious negative impacts that they are no tion also depends on European and global trends, longer able to deliver the goods and services or including those related to demographics, eco- maintain the natural processes on which people nomic growth, trade patterns, technological pro- depend. gress and international cooperation. International At the same , living conditions for people cooperation is therefore vital if we are to resolve across the world are improving. According to the global and European environmental problems. UN,1 the world population is projected to rise to Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodi- 9.6 billion in 2050, while at the same time large versity 2011–2020 adopted by the Convention on population groups will need to be lifted out of pov- Biological Diversity is the world community’s erty. Globally, the number of people in the middle most important tool for safeguarding biodiversity. class is projected to rise from about 1.8 billion in In 2014, a mid-term evaluation of progress so far 2008 to 4.9 billion by 2030.2 World demand was published in Global Biodiversity Outlook 4. is expected to rise by about 50 % up to 2050.3 In This report describes some significant progress themselves, these trends will improve people’s but finds that a great deal still remains to be done welfare, but they will also intensify pressure on to achieve the plan’s targets. the natural environment at both national and inter- The complex nature of the environmental chal- national level, through processes such as land-use lenges facing us means that a wide range of policy change and climate change. The World Economic instruments and processes of change will be Forum report Global Risks 2015 identifies climate- needed to address them. In the short term, tack- related risks and biodiversity loss and ecosystem ling biodiversity-related problems will require pol- collapse among the top risks that may have an icy instruments and action that can give results impact on macroeconomic developments in the rapidly where the threats are most serious, for years ahead. example if species or habitats are at risk of extinc- The European environment – state and outlook tion or destruction. In addition, it is vital to stimu- 2015, published by the European Environment late processes of social change that address the Agency,4 lists three characteristics that are com- underlying causes of biodiversity loss and will mon to many of the environmental challenges fac- have long-term effects. ing Europe today. Firstly, they directly and indi- The European environment – state and outlook rectly affect human health and well-being, as well 2015 and other reports5 indicate that neither envi- as prosperity and standards of living. Secondly, ronmental policies alone nor economic and tech- people are responsible for their existence, since nology-driven efficiency gains are likely to be suf- ficient to achieve the vision out in the EU’s 7th 1 Medium-variant projection as published in: United Nations, Environment Action Programme: ‘In 2050, we live Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population well, within the ’s ecological limits.’ Achiev- Division (2013). World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revi- sion, Highlights and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ing this will require fundamental changes in pro- ESA/P/WP.228. duction and consumption systems, which are the 2 Kharas, Homi. The emerging middle class in developing main drivers of the growing pressure on the envi- countries. Working paper 185. Paris: OECD, 2010. 3 There is uncertainty associated with all these prognoses. 4 EEA, 2015, The European environment – state and outlook 5 OECD (2012), OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050, 2015: synthesis report, European Environment Agency, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/ Copenhagen 9789264122246-en 10 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life ronment. And this in turn will necessitate pro- tion.’ Moreover, the Convention states that, sub- found changes in dominant institutions, practices, ject to the of other states, its provisions , policies, lifestyles and thinking. apply to processes and activities carried out under Unless we devise more resource-efficient pro- the jurisdiction or control of a party to the Con- duction and consumption systems, in other words vention, regardless of where their effects occur systems that reduce greenhouse emissions, (Article 4(b)). material use and environmental pressures, the Businesses can help to reduce environmental cumulative environmental effects will become pressure by improving their environmental per- more and more serious, and will hinder growth formance and making efficient use of resources. and improvements in welfare. A transition to a Companies can develop processes and technolo- greener society, often called the ‘green shift’, gies to make more efficient use of scarce denotes a transformation process to create a soci- resources and reduce emissions. ety where production and consumption have far Ensuring that suppliers and the entire value chain less negative environmental and climate impact meet high environmental standards is an impor- than today. This is both part of sustainable devel- tant element of corporate environmental responsi- opment and an essential basis for it, and ecologi- bility. This applies to all companies, regardless of cal is an essential concern here. their ownership structure.6 The Aichi targets are global in nature but require action at national level. Norway’s contri- butions in this field will focus primarily on national 4.2 The value of ecosystem goods and action, but we are part of a globalised economy services and must take responsibility for the environmen- tal pressure Norwegian activities cause outside The value of nature, and thus the cost to society of the country’s borders through trade and invest- environmental degradation, is often not readily ment. Aichi targets 1, 2, 3 and 4 (under strategic apparent. Countries’ national accounts and calcu- goal A) are important in this context. They lations of the national wealth do not include envi- include raising people’s awareness of the value of ronmental resources. The prices of goods and ser- biodiversity, sustainable production and consump- vices will not reflect the environmental costs asso- tion, and developing and reporting on systems to ciated with their production and consumption ensure that the whole range of biodiversity values unless policy instruments are used to change this. is incorporated into planning and national The true value of nature thus tends to be underes- accounting systems. According to the targets, ‘by timated in private and public decision-making pro- 2020, at the latest, governments, business and cesses, particularly if it takes a long time before stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to any damage becomes apparent or if the damage is achieve or have implemented plans for sustaina- caused in a distant part of the world. ble production and consumption and have kept International initiatives have therefore been the impacts of use of natural resources well within taken to develop methods for demonstrating and safe ecological limits.’ This means that authorities, raising awareness of the value of ecosystem ser- the business sector and other stakeholders in vices (both those with a market price and those Norway too must take steps to ensure that pro- without) in various types of decision-making pro- duction and consumption are sustainable and cesses and documents. The Government will con- within safe ecological limits – both within Norway tinue Norway’s active participation in this work, and abroad. for example in the UN system (UNEP and the UN It is an important principle that states have a Statistics Division), the World , the OECD, responsibility for the environmental impacts their the EU and the Nordic Council of Ministers. activities have in other countries. This follows Even though many people in Norway are from international law, and is specifically men- knowledgeable about biodiversity and its value, tioned in the Convention on Biological Diversity. knowledge about nature, the state of ecosystems Article 3 establishes that states have ‘the sover- and pressures on them nationally and internation- eign right to exploit their own resources pursuant ally can still be improved among both decision to their own environmental policies’, but also that they have the ‘responsibility to ensure that activi- ties within their jurisdiction or control do not 6 Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014) Diverse and value-creating owners- cause damage to the environment of other States hip, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, www.reg- or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdic- jeringen.no 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 11 Nature for life makers and the general public. Knowledge needs ment are thus important as regards biodiversity and related action are discussed in Chapter 8. too. A large body of harmonised food law (includ- ing food safety, health and intermediate inputs) has also been established through the The Government will: EEA Agreement. Norway’s animal health legisla- • Promote the development of methods, indicators tion is fully harmonised with EU law. It includes and models to demonstrate the values associated legislation on disease control and on trade in live with biodiversity and ecosystem services from a and animal products within the EEA and macroeconomic perspective. with non-EEA countries. • Raise the awareness of the general public, deci- Norway and the EU also cooperate closely in sion makers and the business sector about the global and regional biodiversity initiatives, for possible implications for society of changes in eco- example through the system of EEA and Norway systems at national and global level. Grants. This includes projects relating to imple- • Contribute to international efforts under the UN mentation of the Convention on Biological Diver- Statistics Division to continue to develop and test sity and to mapping and assessing the economic the system of environmental-economic accoun- value of ecosystem services. ting, and consider whether to incorporate this Improving resource efficiency is one element into Norway’s reporting and accounting systems. of the EU’s efforts to develop a circular economy. • Develop better methods for integrating the whole Greater resource efficiency is also vital to the suc- range of values associated with biodiversity and cess of efforts to reduce pressure on species and ecosystem services (both those with a market ecosystems to a sustainable level. The aim of a cir- value and those without) into economic analyses cular economy is to maintain the value of materi- and decision-making processes at different levels. als and energy along the value chain, thus mini- • Continue international cooperation to highlight mising waste and resource use. By avoiding a loss and value ecosystem services; this includes conti- of value along material flows, it is possible to cre- nuing the development of qualitative, quantita- ate sustainable economic opportunities and com- tive and monetary approaches to valuation. petitive advantages. The European Commission has announced that an EU action plan for the circular economy 4.3 The EEA Agreement, trade and will be presented towards the end of 2015. The EU investment has indicated that specific, binding proposals for revision of the waste legislation will be put for- 4.3.1 The EEA Agreement and broader ward. These will include requirements for more cooperation with the EU on and re-use to improve resource effi- biodiversity ciency and reduce environmental pressure and at The EU plays a leading role as regards environ- the same time promote economic growth and mental policy, and much of the EU’s environmen- employment. The proposals will also be designed tal legislation is incorporated into Norwegian law to contribute to the achievement of the EU’s cli- through the Agreement on the European Eco- mate targets and to reduce its dependence on nomic Area (EEA Agreement). Legislation on imports of raw materials from outside the Union. nature management, including the and Hab- In summer 2015, Norway submitted its contri- itats Directives, is not part of the EEA Agreement. bution to the consultation on the Commission’s However, some EU legislation with important action plan for the circular economy, and among implications for biodiversity has been incorpo- other things highlighted consumer and product rated into the Agreement, including the Water policy, waste and chemicals policy and green pub- Framework Directive and the Directive on the lic procurement. deliberate release into the environment of geneti- Norway also pointed out that developing a cally modified organisms. The EEA Agreement non-toxic circular economy requires coherence also includes a range of legal acts relating to the between the legislation on chemicals, waste and climate and environment, and these play a part in products. We consider it important to ensure satis- reducing pressure on the environment. They factory consumer rights and legal guarantees, par- include legislation on waste, chemicals and air pol- ticularly as regards the durability of products. It is lution. Norway’s participation in EU processes, its important to develop good indicators and meth- cooperation with the EU and its influence on EU ods that cover the entire life cycle of products in environmental policy through the EEA Agree- order to reduce their environmental and carbon 12 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life footprint. Effective national is the top priorities in the next funding period, which a key instrument for preventing marine litter. Nor- runs from 2014 to 2021. way also gives high priority to action to reduce The European Environment Agency describes food waste, including cooperation with the food its mission as ‘to support sustainable development industry. and to help achieve significant and measurable Strategic use of public procurement to drive improvement in Europe’s environment through progress towards overall policy goals was an the provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reli- important reason for developing the new EU pro- able information to policymaking agents and the curement legislation. With the new legislation, public.’ Norway and 32 other European countries member states have a better instrument for are members of the Agency, which is an important achieving the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy information source for those involved in develop- for ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’. The ing, adopting, implementing and evaluating envi- new legislation encourages wider use of green ronmental policy. procurement than before. It is a new development that the EU is promoting strategic use of procure- ment and clearly defining procurement as an The Government will: instrument for achieving overall social goals. Nor- • Through continued cooperation with the EU and way plans to implement the new legislation in Nor- the European Environment Agency, supply data wegian law during the first six months of 2016. and report on indicators in such a way that the One of the goals of the EU’s 7th Environment information on status and trends for Norwegian Action Programme is to protect nature and biodiversity in relevant European compilations strengthen ecological resilience. The programme of environmental information is comparable to is a common strategy that provides an overall that available from other sources. framework for EU policy and priorities. It sets out • Contribute to the EU’s work on development of common objectives that are to underpin the devel- the circular economy where relevant, parti- opment of new policy and the implementation of cularly as regards waste, chemicals and product existing legislation. The 7th Environment Action policy. Programme was adopted by the EU in 2014 and is being incorporated into Protocol 31 of the EEA Agreement. 4.3.2 Trade and environment The first thematic priority of the programme deals with ‘natural capital’, which includes vital Introduction services such as pollination of , natural pro- In accordance with its political platform, the Nor- tection against flooding, and climate regulation. wegian Government is promoting freer trade and Through the EEA and Norway Grants, Nor- pursuing an active trade policy that emphasises way is contributing to the reduction of social and Norway’s national interests. Trade agreements economic disparities in the EEA. Under these provide an opportunity to shape the course of glo- schemes, grants can be awarded to funds and pro- balisation through international cooperation. The grammes that have clear goals and use results- Government’s objective is to maintain and develop based management. In the period 2009–2014, a trade framework that maximises Norwegian Norway allocated a total of EUR 550 million to the value creation while at the same time contributing programme areas environmental protection and to global growth and sustainable development. management, climate change and renewable In recent decades, Norway’s ties to other energy, and green industry innovation. Funding countries have become even closer, through has for example been granted for projects to step trade, labour migration and capital flows. Produc- up work on climate change mitigation and adapta- tion and consumption are increasingly taking tion, improve the management of marine and place in a global market with global supply chains. inland waters, biodiversity and ecosystems, safe- The international trade in goods and services guard the cultural heritage, strengthen environ- makes it possible to specialise and thus contribute mental monitoring and improve the management to better use of resources and greater productiv- of chemicals and hazardous waste. About EUR 65 ity. million was allocated to projects on biodiversity Norway has an open economy and a consider- management and ecosystem services. Adaptation able volume of trade with other countries. About to climate change is also a key funding area. Cli- 30 % of domestic demand is met through imports. mate, energy and environment will also be among Norwegian production and consumption there- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 13 Nature for life

Figure 4.1 Trade opens up access to a wider selection of products. The world’s genetic resources are the origin of almost all the food we eat. Photo: Svein Magne Fredriksen fore have an influence on the exploitation of agreement on port state measures. The EU has nature in other parts of the world. adopted a Regulation to prevent, deter and elimi- The multilateral trading system includes vari- nate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, ous provisions allowing countries to take steps to and Norway has entered into a bilateral agree- implement a sound environmental and climate ment with the EU to implement the same rules. policy. For example, it is possible to introduce sub- Fisheries management is not part of the EEA sidies, prohibitions, restrictions and labelling sys- Agreement, but Norway has close, broad coopera- tems, provided that such measures are in accord- tion with the EU on the management of pelagic ance with trade rules. Measures may be intro- fish stocks and shared stocks in the North Sea. duced at national, regional or international level. Considerable progress has been made in this field in recent years.

Sustainable fisheries Norway is one of the countries that has been Trade in threatened species advocating the development of effective rules The Convention on International Trade in Endan- under the World Trade Organization (WTO) to gered Species of Wild and (CITES) is prohibit fisheries subsidies that contribute to intended to ensure that trade in species to which it overfishing, excess capacity and illegal, unre- applies is sustainable. Trade in these species is ported and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing). organised through a licensing system, with Norway also played an active role in work under licences issued by national authorities. CITES spe- the Food and Organization of the UN cies are placed on one of three lists, depending on (FAO) resulting in the conclusion of the global how seriously threatened they are by interna- 14 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life tional trade. In all, about 35 000 species are cur- A white paper on globalisation and trade pub- rently listed, about 1000 of them in Appendix I, lished in 2015 (Meld. St. 29 (2014–2015)) dis- which puts the strictest restrictions on trade. cusses the interactions between trade policy and The Convention was implemented in Norwe- climate and environment. It is crucial that both gian law by the Regulations of 15 November 2002 the international trade regime and Norway’s free No. 1276. New regulations are being drawn up trade agreements promote green growth and take which in some respects will go beyond the mini- climate change and environmental considerations mum requirements of the convention. The regula- into account. The international trade regime can tions will also implement decisions made by the play a role in facilitating more environmentally Conference of the Parties after the adoption of the sound and climate-friendly development. It can current regulations, and will widen their scope to also advance the ‘green shift’ by promoting include keeping or possession and trade within increased trade in environmental goods and ser- Norway. vices and by reducing unnecessary barriers to such trade. Trade commitments must be designed to take into account countries’ need to implement Globalisation and trade effective environmental and climate policies, and By trading with and investing in other countries, must facilitate green growth. Policy instruments Norway is contributing to a global division of that can be used in this connection include neces- labour in the production of goods and services. sary climate and environmental standards, envi- Norwegian companies are increasingly turning ronmental taxes on goods and services, informa- towards and becoming established in new growth tion and labelling requirements, environmental markets, which may be in countries where gov- subsidies and facilitation of increased trade in cli- ernance is weak and the environmental legislation mate and environmentally friendly goods and ser- is poorly developed. This trend is bringing about vices. At the same time, it is important that coun- economic growth and improvements in welfare, tries are not permitted to unilaterally implement but is also causing growth in production, con- discriminatory or protectionist measures that sumption and transport. The latter may increase unnecessarily obstruct trade. pressure on the environment, for example through heavier use of scarce natural resources, releases of greenhouse and pollutants and The Government will: the spread of alien species. However, international • Continue to include a separate chapter on trade trade and investment can also promote more cli- and sustainable development in the free trade mate friendly and environmentally sound develop- agreements Norway enters into, as a contribu- ment, for instance by deploying more effective tion to achieving international biodiversity tar- and greener and encouraging the loca- gets. tion of different forms of production in areas • Support efforts to combat environmental crime, where they will put least pressure on the environ- including fisheries-related crime, among other ment. In principle, there is thus no contradiction things through relevant international processes between an open world trading system and a and programmes. sound climate and environmental policy. Like EU treaties and law, the EEA Agreement includes a wide range of provisions designed to 4.3.3 Investments and green markets promote conservation and sustainable use of nature. Trade agreements are increasingly incor- Introduction porating environmental provisions, for example in Norway has substantial financial investments the form of separate chapters on trade and sus- abroad, held both by the Government and by pri- tainable development. Norway and the European vate investors. Most of these investments are in Free Trade Association (EFTA) have decided that Europe and (about 80 % of the a trade and sustainable development chapter Government Pension Fund Global and 70 % of for- should be part of the standard model for free eign direct investments). trade agreements. Norway is also playing an There is no clear definition of the term ‘green active part in the negotiations on the Environmen- investments’. According to the OECD, green tal Goods Agreement, which is intended to pro- growth means fostering economic growth and mote trade in environmental goods and if possible development while at the same time ensuring that also related services. natural assets continue to provide the resources 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 15 Nature for life and environmental services on which our well- supply chain can help companies to manage envi- being relies.7 Green investments can therefore be ronmental risk better. understood as investments that promote green The white paper Diverse and value-creating growth, including investments that are made tak- ownership (Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014)) describes ing into consideration environmental issues in the what the Norwegian Government expects in broad sense (including greenhouse gas emis- terms of responsible corporate governance, sions, air pollution, chemicals, biodiversity and including environmental responsibility, from com- waste management). panies in which the state has an ownership inter- Actors in the financial sector, both in Norway est. All Norwegian companies, regardless of and abroad, have shown growing interest in green whether they are privately or publicly owned and and sustainable investments in recent years. At of whether they operate in Norway or abroad, are the UN Climate in New York in Septem- expected to apply good corporate governance ber 2014, a new coalition of institutional investors practices. The white paper emphasises that the was launched. Their goal is to substantially Government expects companies in which the reduce the carbon footprint of their portfolios by state has an ownership interest to work systemati- December 2015. In the past year, several pension cally on corporate governance and seek to be at funds have been reducing their allocation to coal the forefront in their respective fields. The corpo- and petroleum and shifting their assets towards rate environmental responsibility of the business green investments. Several of the funds have sector involves ensuring that environmental and highlighted the fact that manging environmental resource use considerations, including the pres- risk and making use of opportunities for green sure a company puts on the environment, are inte- investment are vital considerations in their invest- grated into financial decision making. In addition ment decisions.8 to complying with national and international envi- ronmental standards, companies should take a proactive approach in order to reduce the adverse Private-sector investments environmental impacts of their operations beyond Environmental risk in the financial sector includes what is stipulated in such standards. the risk that environmental problems themselves, According to the white paper on private sector or restructuring of environmental policy involving development in Norwegian development coopera- stricter regulation or substantially higher carbon tion (Meld. St. 35 (2014–2015)), the Government prices, will influence economic developments and wishes to provide strong support to Norwegian financial variables in the future. companies abroad, and is stepping up the efforts Actors in the financial sector have been paying to assist companies in new, demanding markets. growing attention to climate and environmental As part of this support, guidance, dialogue and issues in recent years. For example, institutional practical cooperation on challenges posed by local investors are to a greater degree assessing and framework conditions and governance issues are disclosing the environmental risk associated with being strengthened. their portfolios. One system they can use is devel- A number of cooperation forums have been oped by CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure established by and for the private sector with the Project), an independent, not-for-profit organisa- aim of building knowledge and developing sys- tion that collects and publishes environmental tems to address challenges related to biodiversity. information on companies, including their green- Within the EU, this work is being organised under house gas emissions, contribution to the European Business and Biodiversity Platform. and water consumption. Identifying the environ- The Natural Capital Coalition (formerly the TEEB mental pressure caused by different parts of the for Business Coalition) is a global cooperation forum where the business sector can cooperate to 7 Inderst, G., Kaminker, Ch., Stewart, F. (2012), Defining and safeguard natural capital, for example by raising Measuring Green Investments: Implications for Institutional awareness of the impacts on business of loss of Investors’ Asset Allocations, OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions, No.24, OECD natural capital. The coalition is seeking to bring Publishing; OECD (2011) Towards green growth – A sum- about a shift in corporate behaviour and thus mary for policy makers, OECD Publishing, Paris. avoid unsustainable use of natural resources. The 8 See for example UNEP et. al (2014) Financial Institutions coalition is developing a Natural Capital Protocol taking action on Climate Change http://www.unepfi.org/ fileadmin/documents/FinancialInstitutionsTakingAction- and systems for natural capital disclosure and risk OnClimateChange.pdf assessments. 16 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

budget, this criterion was worded as follows: The Government Pension Fund Global ‘ or exclusion may be decided for The overriding goal for investments by the Gov- companies and power producers which ernment Pension Fund Global is to obtain the themselves or through entities they control derive highest possible returns at moderate risk. The 30 % or more of their income from thermal coal or Fund’s position as a long-term investor with a base 30 % or more of their operations on thermal broad global portfolio of equities, bonds and real coal’. estate means that climate change and climate pol- A white paper giving an account of the man- icy measures may have implications for portfolio agement of the Government Pension Fund Global return in future. Climate change has therefore is published each year during the parlia- been a key area in the management of the Fund mentary session. for a long time. Climate change can also be included as one element of a broader risk assess- ment of business models and the long-term sus- Green bonds tainability of companies in which the Fund has The green bond concept was developed in 2008 by invested. the World Bank and the Swedish bank SEB. About 6 % of the value of the Fund’s bench- These bonds are intended specifically to raise cap- mark index for equity investments, which at the ital to fund environmentally sound investments. end of the first six months of 2015 corresponded The market for green bonds is growing rapidly9, to about NOK 260 billion, is in companies that but is still a very small proportion of the total obtain more than 20 % of their return from envi- world market for bonds. In 2014, USD 36.6 billion ronment-related activities, including renewable was issued in green bonds, three as much energy. In principle, the Fund’s equity invest- as in 2013. ments in environment-related companies will Several different analysts have pointed out increase if their share of the world’s equity market that it may be an attractive proposition for institu- rises. tional investors to make long-term investments in In 2009, it was decided to establish environ- infrastructure, including in environment-related ment-related mandates for the Fund. They have sectors.10 Green bonds are a type of financial the same risk and return requirements as the instrument that to a large extent targets institu- Fund’s other investments. In the white paper The tional investors, and can therefore be an impor- Management of the Government Pension Fund in tant way of expanding environmentally sound 2014 (Meld. St. 21 (2014–2015)), the Government investments. However, the environmental profile proposed that the upper limit for such invest- of the green bonds that have been issued is dis- ments should be raised to NOK 30–60 billion. The puted, since there is as yet no specific standard or Storting (Norwegian parliament) endorsed this clear definition of what is meant by ‘green bonds’. when it considered the white paper. It is up to the issuer to label bonds as ‘green’ and In the same white paper, the Government pro- to provide information on how funds are used. posed a new conduct-based criterion for observa- Several independent bodies currently provide tion and exclusion from the Fund’s portfolio. This evaluations of green bonds, and Norwegian bod- is an ethical criterion, and applies if there is an ies include CICERO and DNV GL. In addition, the unacceptable risk that companies contribute to or Green Bond Principles provide guidelines clarify- are responsible for ‘acts or omissions that on an ing which bonds can be called ‘green bonds’. It aggregate company level lead to unacceptable has been questioned whether issuing green bonds greenhouse gas emissions’. This proposal was results in more investment in environmentally also endorsed by the Storting when it considered sound projects than would have been the case if the white paper. In the 2016 Norwegian budget, they were not labelled as ‘green’. In January 2015, the Government followed up a recommendation to the Oslo Stock Exchange published separate lists the Storting (Innst. 290 S (2014–2015)) on the of green bonds, and was the first stock exchange white paper, in which the standing committee in the world to do so. asked the Government to propose a new product- based criterion for observation and exclusion 9 OECD Mapping channels to mobilise institutional invest- from the Fund’s portfolio for mining companies ments in sustainable energy, 2015 10 and power producers that base a substantial pro- Kaminker, C. et al. (2013), Institutional Investors and Investments: Selected Case Studies, portion of their operations on thermal coal (coal OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private that is used for energy production). In the 2016 Pensions, No. 35, OECD Publishing 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 17 Nature for life

Figure 4.2 Tropical rainforests contain a large proportion of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity. - forests also play a vital part in regulating climate and moderating climate change. Norway is contributing to rainforest conservation through its International Climate and Forest Initiative. Photo: Thomas Martens, Rainforest Foundation Norway

strategies and planning processes. It also applies Green equity indices to Norwegian development cooperation. A number of equity indices focus on climate- and Norwegian aid contributes to the conservation environment-related sectors, but because ‘green’ of biodiversity in a number of ways, both through is not a clearly defined term, they use a number of specific programmes and through the integration different approaches. However, one common fea- of biodiversity considerations into development ture has been that the composition of these indi- cooperation as a whole. This topic is discussed in ces has changed considerably over time, which is the annual budget proposal from the Ministry of partly a reflection of the dynamic nature of this Foreign Affairs. The Government’s objective is for market segment and the high level of risk. Norway to play a leading role in role in integrating environmental issues into development coopera- tion and to play a part in the green shift interna- The Government will: tionally. • Encourage and provide opportunities for the Norway is a key supporter of programmes that Norwegian business sector to take part in Euro- involve systematic competence building in devel- pean and international cooperation to safeguard oping countries in the fields of green economy, biodiversity. knowledge-based nature management and tools for green industrial development. Norway’s International Climate and Forest Ini- 4.4 Development cooperation tiative is seeking to reduce greenhouse gas emis- sions from deforestation and forest degradation in Aichi target 2 is for biodiversity values to be inte- developing countries. Important rainforest coun- grated into development and poverty reduction tries are therefore key partners, and , Guy- 18 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life ana and Indonesia have received most funding so of biodiversity in forests in developing countries, far. The main approach used by the Climate and and particularly rainforests, the Climate and For- Forest Initiative is to pay for emission reductions est Initiative is also considered to be a very impor- in countries that succeed in reducing deforesta- tant instrument for safeguarding biodiversity. tion and forest degradation. Given the huge value 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 19 Nature for life

5 Sustainable use and good ecological status in ecosystems

5.1 Introduction for human survival, for supplies of food and other raw materials, and for maintaining strong primary The Government’s main approach in its biodiver- industries. Sustainable forestry, fisheries, aqua- sity strategy is to ensure that the nature manage- culture and agriculture depend on well-function- ment regime is sustainable, so that the overall ing ecosystems. Industries that use active sub- pressure resulting from human activities and use stances, enzymes and genetic code from biologi- of nature allows Norwegian ecosystems to main- cal material to manufacture medicines, foodstuffs tain good ecological status over time as far as pos- and other products are also responsible for sub- sible. This is the main theme of Chapter 5. Other stantial value creation. Moreover, healthy ecosys- important approaches to safeguarding biodiver- tems are important for public health, for example sity in Norway are action to protect threatened by providing people with opportunities for emo- species and habitat types (Chapter 6) and the con- tional and aesthetic experience and for engaging servation of a representative selection of Norwe- in outdoor activities. gian nature for future generations (Chapter 7). In connection with administrative decisions, it Many of the Aichi targets are essentially con- is necessary to find a balance between costs and cerned with maintaining well-functioning ecosys- benefits. In many cases, other public interests are tems or improving ecological status, particularly considered so important that activities or develop- numbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14 and 15. The Strate- ments that will disturb the natural environment gic Plan for Biodiversity calls for action to ensure are permitted. In other cases, the weight given to that ‘ecosystems are resilient and continue to pro- other public interests may mean that it is accepted vide essential services’ and that ‘biological that parts of an ecosystem will not achieve good resources are sustainably used’, and its targets ecological status. In addition, pressures that are include action to restore degraded ecosystems not under national control, such as climate and maintain the integrity and functioning of eco- change, ocean acidification and long-range trans- systems. These aims are reflected in one of Nor- port of pollutants, may make it impossible to way’s national environmental targets for biodiver- achieve good ecological status in all parts of eco- sity, which is that ‘Norwegian ecosystems will systems. achieve good status and deliver ecosystem ser- In general, the status of Norway’s ecosystems vices’.1 is relatively good. A great deal has already been The target of achieving good ecological status done to safeguard the natural environment, and is based on the fundamental idea that well-func- Norway has introduced a wide range of legal and tioning ecosystems benefit society as a whole, and economic instruments that can be used in build- that we have an obligation to pass on healthy eco- ing up a sound, ecosystem-based management systems to future generations. The objects clause system. The most important legal instruments are of Norway’s Nature Diversity Act also highlights the Planning and Building Act and sectoral legisla- the importance of the environment as a basis for tion such as the Water Resources Act, the Water- human activity, culture (including Sami culture), course Regulation Act, the Energy Act, the Pollu- health and well-being. tion Control Act, the Svalbard Environmental Pro- Healthy ecosystems are also of decisive impor- tection Act, the Marine Resources Act, the Aqua- tance for nature’s capacity to provide ecosystem culture Act, the Petroleum Act, the Forestry Act services that human society depends on, such as and the Land Act, applied together with the pollination of food plants, climate regulation, flood Nature Diversity Act. Norway thus has a sound control and clean drinking water. These are vital legislative basis for sustainable nature manage- ment. The Ministry of Climate and Environment 1 Norway’s environmental targets in English are listed here: has commissioned a report on experience gained http://www.environment.no/goals/ during the first few years of the application of the 20 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Nature Diversity Act, and Chapters 6, 8 and 9 gian parliament) concerning various issues relat- include some proposals for follow-up measures to ing to the management of peatlands. improve the application of the Act and make it more effective. The Government also proposes some changes in the application of other legisla- 5.2 The Nature Diversity Act tion for the same purpose, for example amend- ments to regulations, changes in the weighting to The Nature Diversity Act is one of the most impor- be used when making individual decisions, and tant instruments that was adopted as a result of improvements in the guidance provided. When it Norway’s first national strategy for the implemen- considers the need for new economic instruments tation of the Convention on Biological Diversity or changes to existing instruments, the Govern- (Report No. 42 to the Storting (2000–2001)). The ment will primarily consider the recommenda- Act applies to Norwegian land territory, including tions of the Green Tax Commission. Further infor- river systems, and to Norwegian territorial mation can be found in the sections of this white waters. Its provisions on access to genetic mate- paper on individual ecosystems, and in Chapter 9 rial also apply to Svalbard and Jan Mayen. Certain on the roles and responsibilities of the municipali- provisions of the Act also apply on the continental ties and counties. shelf and in the areas of jurisdiction established However, Norway still has work to do in this under the Act relating to the economic zone of field. One problem for the Norwegian authorities Norway to the extent they are appropriate. is the lack of clear, agreed management objectives According to the objects clause, the purpose of for ‘good ecological status’ in most ecosystems, the Act is ‘to protect biological, geological and even though ‘sustainable’ management is speci- diversity and ecological processes fied as a goal in a number of statutes. The excep- through conservation and sustainable use, and in tions are coastal and freshwater ecosystems and such a way that the environment provides a basis to some extent marine ecosystems. Clearly for human activity, culture, health and well-being, defined and agreed management objectives for now and in the future, including a basis for Sami the different ecosystems would provide a better culture’. basis for making decisions in cases where a bal- Experience gained so far from application of ance needs to be found between different inter- the Nature Diversity Act has played a part in the ests and social objectives, and would help to development of the Government’s biodiversity achieve environmentally, socially and economi- policy. Since the Act has only been in force for a cally sustainable development. For Svalbard, few years, information on its effects is still limited. there is an ambitious target of maintaining the vir- This applies particularly to its effects on the eco- tually untouched natural environment, but in this logical status of ecosystems, which can only be case too, there is a lack of clear management assessed over a longer time period. In addition, objectives for ecological status. It is therefore diffi- the Act is only one of a number of policy instru- cult to judge whether current use is ecologically ments, and the state of the environment in the sustainable, and one result may be that policy long term will depend on the combination of all instruments are not used effectively enough. In policy instruments that are applied and the whole addition, land conversion and land-use change is range of pressures and impacts on ecosystems. still, overall, the most important driver of biodiver- The provisions of the Nature Diversity Act that sity loss in Norway. Furthermore, the Norwegian are particularly relevant to this chapter are the nature management system has not yet been general provisions on sustainable use, including adapted to take into account changes in ecosys- general principles of environmental law (‘princi- tems caused by climate change. In addition, there ples for official decision-making’, Chapter II), the are specific problems in the different ecosystems. provisions on species management (Chapter III) In this chapter, the Government proposes spe- and the provisions on alien organisms (Chapter cific action and tools to improve the sustainability IV). of biodiversity management over time. More gen- The Ministry of Climate and Environment eral measures are discussed first, followed by commissioned a report from the consultancy firm more specific measures for each of the major eco- Multiconsult on experience of the application of systems. The section on wetlands includes an the principles of environmental law set out in the account of how the Government intends to Act and its provisions on priority species, selected respond to a request from the Storting (Norwe- habitat types and exemptions from protection decisions, which was published on 30 September 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 21 Nature for life

2014. Additional information was obtained 5.3 Developing management through talks with business organisations and objectives for good ecological others after the report was published. status The provisions on species management in the Nature Diversity Act were largely retained or As mentioned above, one problem for the Norwe- transferred from other legislation – the gian nature management authorities is the lack of Act, the Act relating to salmonids and freshwater clear, agreed management objectives for ‘good fish and the Nature Conservation Act. The provi- ecological status’ in most ecosystems, with the sions on alien organisms in the Nature Diversity exception of coastal and freshwater ecosystems Act, together with new Regulations relating to and to some extent marine ecosystems. This alien organisms, enter into force on 1 January results in differing views on the need for action 2016. These new rules will be important in pre- and where to strike a balance between different venting the import and release of invasive alien interests. The Nature Diversity Act will continue organisms. However, they will not provide a solu- to be an important tool for a cross-sectoral tion to all the problems associated with invasive approach to sustainable nature management, par- alien organisms that are already established in the ticularly through general management objectives Norwegian environment. Eradicating, containing for species and habitat types, principles for deci- and controlling invasive alien organisms requires sion-making, and instruments such as the desig- a great deal of time and resources, and complete nation of selected habitat types. However, the Act eradication is not realistic. Priority measures are does not provide guidance on specific manage- discussed in the sections on each ecosystem in ment objectives for good ecological status to be Chapter 5.5. The Ministry of Climate and Environ- used in the overall management of each ecosys- ment will in consultation with other relevant min- tem. istries draw up an overall action plan describing The Ministry of Climate and Environment will priorities for eradicating, containing and con- initiate the development of scientifically based cri- trolling invasive alien organisms. teria for what is considered to be ‘good ecological The provision of the Nature Diversity Act on status’. This will be carried out in close coopera- quality norms for biological, geological and land- tion with relevant sectors, and will as far as possi- scape diversity has only been used once, to estab- ble be based on existing criteria and indicators. lish quality norms for wild salmon stocks. This Defining what is meant by ‘good ecological status’ provision was not included when information on is the first step in developing management objec- the application of the Act was being collected. tives for ecological status in different areas. It will Quality norms can be useful tools if there is agree- not necessarily be Norway’s objective to achieve ment that a species or habitat type requires spe- good ecological status everywhere. If other public cial safeguards, for example because a population interests weigh more heavily, it may be decided is declining, but it is not clear what needs to be that it is acceptable for parts of an ecosystem not done and several sectors are involved in manage- to achieve good status. In addition, pressures that ment. In such cases, establishing a quality norm are not under national control, such as climate can encourage the development of a joint knowl- change, ocean acidification and long-range trans- edge base and joint targets for the management of port of pollutants, may make it impossible to the species or habitat type. achieve good ecological status everywhere. The Multiconsult’s report recommends some steps Government will develop management objectives to clarify the scope of the principles of environ- for ecological status in the various ecosystems, mental law and provide better guidance on how and determine which types of areas or which they should be applied in practice. These are parts of each ecosystem should achieve good eco- being followed up during the revision of the guide- logical status, taking all necessary factors into lines on the application of the principles for official consideration. Specific management objectives for decision-making. In addition, the report makes ecological status are to be established by 2017. recommendations on the application of the provi- The work will include all the major ecosystems sions on priority species and selected habitat except for the areas that come within the scope of types, and on improvements of the knowledge the Water Management Regulations. base and steps to build up expertise at local and Once the management objectives for ecologi- regional level. cal status have been established, the Government will organise the use of policy instruments with a view to maintaining ecological status in areas and 22 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Ecological status SUGAR KELP FOREST AS AN EXAMPLE

Climate change and higher nutrient concentrations are two factors that can have a negative impact on sugar kelp forests. Climate change means higher temperatures on land and at sea, warmer and wetter winters, higher and more flooding. All this results in more runoff and higher levels of particulate and nutrients.

food supplies for larger fish and seabirds reduced High species diversity

Species diversity greatly reduced

High annual Shelter, important Loss of shelter for Largeloss of , production of coastal cod, crustaceans nursery area for fish less CO2 fixation material and crustaceans and other species

GOOD ECOLOGICAL STATUS POOR ECOLOGICAL STATUS Ecological status is good if species and Ecological status is poor if human activity has led to habitats show little change as a result radical changes from the original species and habitat of human activities, and types. For sugar kelp forests, this includes die-back of environmental conditions and kelp plants, which are replaced by "turf ", but only biodiversity are maintained over in summer. This results in loss of primary production time. For sugar kelp forests, this and the loss of many other species and their habitats.

includes the presence of large kelp There is less food for large fish and seabirds, and CO2 plants, small algae, , fixation is lower. crustaceans, molluscs and fish.

Figure 5.1 An illustration of what is meant by good and poor ecological status, using sugar kelp forest as an example. Illustration: Nyhetsgrafikk 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 23 Nature for life ecosystems where it is already good enough and loss of or damage to valuable biodiversity, the pre- improving it in areas where ecological status is ferred solution should generally be to locate it poorer than stipulated by the management objec- elsewhere. However, depending on the weight tives. The Government will use this system as a given to other important public interests, a differ- tool for making nature management more effec- ent conclusion may be reached. These principles tive and for setting priorities for restoration pro- follow from the Nature Diversity Act together with jects in accordance with Aichi target 15. The Gov- sectoral legislation. ernment’s aim is for a management system based If, after weighing up all the advantages and dis- on clearly defined objectives for ecological status advantages in a particular case, it is concluded to be in place by 2020. that the negative consequences will have to be While this management system is being devel- accepted, the competent authority should con- oped, the Government will continue to apply sec- sider whether to require mitigation measures in toral legislation, the Planning and Building Act, accordance with the legal basis provided by the the Nature Diversity Act and the Svalbard Envi- relevant legislation. In addition, restoration of ronmental Protection Act to reduce pressure on areas that are damaged by temporary develop- the environment and safeguard areas that are ments or activities should be required once these important for biodiversity. have ceased. If there are still significant residual impacts, it may be appropriate to lay down requirements for ecological compensation if the The Government will: relevant legislation provides the legal basis for • Initiate work to clarify what is meant by ‘good this. Sections 11 and 12 of the Nature Diversity ecological status’, based on scientific and verifia- Act on the user-pays principle and on environmen- ble criteria. tally sound techniques and methods of operation • By the end of 2017, establish management obje- may have a bearing on the interpretation of the ctives for the ecological status to be maintained types of requirements that can be used. Ecological or achieved in Norwegian ecosystems. compensation does not apply to the area where a • Seek to put in place a management system based development is being carried out, but to restora- on clearly defined objectives for ecological status tion, establishment or protection of biodiversity in by 2020. another equivalent areas, preferably nearby and containing the same type of habitat. Compensa- tion measures may involve restoring degraded 5.4 Overall land-use management habitat, creating new areas of habitat or protecting policy areas that would not otherwise have been pro- tected. Such measures are often complex in eco- Given that land conversion and land-use change is still the most important driver of biodiversity loss in Norway today, the Government will seek to ensure that environmental considerations are High Avoid potential negative impacts incorporated into and as appropriate given priority (e.g. by careful siting) Avoid in relevant decisions on land use. This applies to Minimise impacts that cannot be decisions taken by central government authorities completely avoided by reducing Minimise their duration, intensity or extent and, equally importantly, to decisions taken as during planning and construction. part of the municipalities’ land-use management Restore to reduce residual

PRIORITISE Restore impacts after the project is responsibilities under the Planning and Building completed.

Act. The municipalities are important partners in Compensate Conservation action in other Low areas to compensate for loss of biodiversity conservation, and their role is dis- ecological or agricultural cussed in more depth in Chapter 9. functions or qualities. The Government uses two principles as a basis for land-use decisions that affect biodiversity. Firstly, the most valuable species, habitats and Figure 5.2 Ecological compensation ecosystems should be safeguarded in connection The figure shows the basic principles of the mitigation hierar- with decisions on land conversion and land-use chy and ecological compensation. The cheapest and most effe- change. This requires good planning procedures ctive way of reducing negative impacts is always to avoid da- mage, and the preferred sequence of steps is to avoid or mini- and a sound, up-to-date knowledge base. Sec- mise damage, followed by restoration, with compensation as ondly, if a development or activity entails a risk of the last resort. 24 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

towns and built-up areas; lakes, river systems and river mouths; and migration routes in the sea and on land. The term ‘green infrastructure’ includes all such areas. Green infrastructure is not only essential for biodiversity, but also valuable for people, for example in connection with flood control and out- door recreation. Such multiple benefits are an important reason why the EU has included the establishment of green infrastructure as one of the targets of its biodiversity strategy. Land-use planning under the Planning and Building Act is Norway’s most important tool for establishing green infrastructure on land and out to one nautical mile from the baseline in coastal waters. Existing protected areas can also function as green infrastructure, and according to the Figure 5.3 Map showing the green structure and Nature Diversity Act, protected areas may be the limit of the built-up zone (red lines) in part of established to promote the conservation of ‘eco- Trondheim. The corridor along the river Nidelven logical and landscape coherence at national and is shown in blue. The map was produced using the international level’. The most suitable tools for municipality’s tool. promoting ecological coherence will vary depend- ing on the species involved and how much it is logical terms and also costly, and should normally necessary to restrict the way an area is used to only be considered as a last resort. achieve the purpose in each case. The need to One of the main steps the Government is tak- improve ecological coherence, particularly in the ing to ensure that Norwegian land-use manage- context of climate change, and how this can be ment takes biodiversity properly into account is to achieved, will be further reviewed. obtain better spatial data on species, ecosystems and landscapes, see Chapter 8. Another approach is to strengthen municipal work on biodiversity The Government will: and build up municipal expertise in this field, see • Continue to work towards a land-use manage- Chapter 9. Furthermore, building up knowledge ment regime that takes biodiversity properly into about the value of nature and ecosystem services, account by ensuring a sound knowledge base and which is discussed in Chapter 4, will give a better strengthening local and regional expertise on basis for finding a balance between different inter- biodiversity and the values associated with it. ests. The Government also proposes specific uses • Further review the need to improve ecological of sectoral legislation for various ecosystems in coherence and how to achieve this. Chapter 5.5 below. Ecological coherence is of vital importance for maintaining biodiversity. Species need continuous 5.5 Management policy for each of or functionally connected areas of suitable habitat Norway’s major ecosystems to allow mobility and the exchange of genetic material and ensure long-term survival. Because 5.5.1 Marine and coastal waters individual species’ needs vary so much, it is not Norway’s system of management plans for sea possible to establish general guidelines on what areas is a tool for integrated, ecosystem-based provides ecological coherence. However, it is management, in other words a management sys- clear that climate change will make ecological tem that promotes conservation and sustainable coherence even more important. The habitat in use of ecosystems. Management plans have now species’ existing ranges will change as the climate been drawn up for all three of Norway’s sea areas: changes, and many species will have to adapt by the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, the Norwegian shifting to new areas. Areas that are important for Sea, and the North Sea and Skagerrak. The man- ecological coherence may be found in any type of agement plans have been published in the form of ecosystem. Types of areas that may be important white papers submitted to the Storting. ecological corridors include green in 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 25 Nature for life

instruments for achieving and maintaining good ecological status in waters out to one nautical mile outside the baseline. The Water Management Regulations are discussed further in Chapter 5.5.2. Ensuring that maritime is used in a way that takes proper account of biodiversity is just as important as land-use planning elsewhere. In waters out to one nautical mile outside the base- line, the main instrument for spatial planning is the Planning and Building Act. The Government is updating its advice on municipal spatial plan- ning for areas in coastal waters. The aim is to ensure as much consistency as possible from one municipality to another, and to give clear guide- lines for how biodiversity considerations should be incorporated into the planning process. The Government will also assess how marine spatial planning and land-use planning in the coastal zone can best be coordinated. This is important for spe- cies, habitats and ecosystems in the transitional zone between sea and land and how they are affected by local developments and pollution. The marine management plans include spatial man- agement measures as tools for ecosystem-based Figure 5.4 Map of Norway’s marine management management. The river basin management plans plan areas. under the Water Management Regulations must Source: Norwegian Environment Agency/Norwegian Mapping include environmental objectives for water bodies. Authority Approved management plans must be used as a basis for the activities of regional bodies and for municipal and central government planning and The purpose of the management plans is to activities in the river basin district. Measures set provide a framework for value creation through out in the marine management plans and the river the sustainable use of natural resources and eco- basin management plans are implemented in the system services in the sea areas and at the same usual way under the appropriate legislation and time maintain the structure, functioning, produc- following normal administrative procedures. tivity and diversity of the ecosystems. The man- The most important elements of the Govern- agement plans are thus a tool both for facilitating ment’s policy for sustainable management of value creation and food security, and for maintain- marine and coastal waters in specific sectors are ing the high environmental value of the sea areas. described below. Measures to protect threatened The management plans clarify the overall species and habitats and to ensure protection of a framework and encourage closer coordination representative selection of Norwegian nature are and clear priorities for management of Norway’s described in Chapters 6 and 7. sea areas. Activities in each area are regulated on the basis of existing legislation governing differ- ent sectors. The Government will continue to use Harvesting living marine resources the system of marine management plans. The Marine Resources Act provides a framework The Government’s initiative to develop clearer for sustainable harvesting of living marine management objectives for ‘good ecological sta- resources. It requires management based on the tus’ in ecosystems (discussed in Chapter 5.3) will precautionary approach in accordance with inter- make it possible to target action and policy instru- national agreements and guidelines, and using an ments to maintain and achieve good ecological ecosystem approach that takes into account both status in marine ecosystems more precisely. The habitats and biodiversity. Management is also river basin management plans drawn up under the based on the best available scientific information. Water Management Regulations are the main Harvesting methods and the way gear is used 26 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Figure 5.5 The Norwegian stock of European lobster is no longer considered to be threatened. One of the conservation measures the authorities have introduced is the closure of certain areas to lobster trap- ping. Photo: Rudolf Svensen must take into account the need to reduce possi- care during fishing operations near known coral ble adverse impacts on living marine resources. reefs. Many new coral reefs have been registered Mapping of the seabed, for example through in Norwegian waters through the MAREANO pro- the MAREANO programme, has documented that gramme and other projects. fisheries activities are having a considerable Some fish species, including sandeels, herring impact on benthic ecosystems in certain areas, and capelin, are defined as key species in ecosys- and trawling has the strongest impacts. Trawls tems, and have a large influence on other ele- have been in use for more than a hundred years, ments of the biodiversity. They are important prey and trawling has largely been concentrated in the for a variety of marine , other fish and same areas. In recent years, there has been a sub- seabirds, and their stock size has a major influ- stantial reduction in trawl hours, partly because ence on populations of other species. Norway has more fish have been available, and pressure on chosen to introduce a new management model for benthic habitats has therefore been reduced. The the sandeel fishery in the North Sea. The aim is to area trawled has also been smaller than in previ- build up viable spawning stocks throughout the ous years. Technological developments are part of the sandeel range that is within Norway’s improving efficiency and resulting in trawling Exclusive Economic Zone. gear that has less environmental impact. The Gov- The Government will continue to use a num- ernment will continue to promote the develop- ber of measures to build up the Norwegian stock ment and use of trawling gear that has as little of European lobster. Strict regulation of lobster impact as possible on the seabed, and of devices catches will continue. There are still frequent in trawls that minimise unwanted bycatches. breaches of the rules on lobster harvesting, and The Regulations relating to sea-water fisheries control and enforcement at sea will therefore con- contain a general requirement to show special tinue. The closure of certain areas to lobster trap- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 27 Nature for life ping is a suitable conservation measure for a rela- cable-laying, when fields cease production, and in tively stationary species like the lobster, and has connection with the disposal of installations. Fur- been shown to boost lobster numbers locally. The ther conditions apply in certain areas, for example Government will assess whether further action is restrictions on when drilling and seismic surveys needed to prevent the American lobster from are permitted in order to protect biodiversity and becoming established in Norway in addition to safeguard the interests of other industries. the prohibition on importing live American lob- An operator must obtain a permit under the sters. Pollution Control Act before starting petroleum activities. Permits include conditions relating to releases to air and sea and preparedness and Aquaculture response to acute pollution, which depend on the Aquaculture can have negative environmental vulnerability of the area in question and the availa- impacts. In order to play a part in biodiversity con- ble technology. For example, special require- servation, the aquaculture authorities will take ments may be included to avoid adverse impacts into account all pressures and impacts associated on corals and other vulnerable benthic fauna, sea- with aquaculture activities, and not only direct populations, and fish stocks during the impacts at each aquaculture site. spawning season. The aquaculture legislation includes a number This system ensures that environmental con- of important tools designed to safeguard the envi- siderations are integrated into all phases of petro- ronment, including requirements for monitoring leum activities from exploration to field develop- the ecological status of the seabed below and near ment, operations and field closure, and helps to aquaculture facilities, criteria for authorising the maintain good ecological status in Norwegian sea use of areas for aquaculture and rules on the max- areas. imum permitted biomass of fish at each locality. There are also general operating rules, including requirements for fallowing for disease control, Shipping, ports and fairways technical requirements to prevent fish escapes A high level of maritime safety and a satisfactory and rules on combating salmon lice and the preparedness and response system for acute pol- removal of escaped farmed fish from rivers. The lution are essential for preventing damage to bio- rules are constantly being further developed, and diversity. The Norwegian Coastal Administration regulations were recently adopted making the continually seeks to optimise maritime safety, pre- industry responsible for funding measures to paredness and response measures. These must reduce the proportion of escaped farmed fish in be designed on the basis of information about the rivers. The Government is also taking steps to probability of accidents and their possible conse- strengthen the knowledge base in these areas. quences for life, health and the environment. In The Government considers environmental 2016, the Government plans to submit a white sustainability to be the most important criterion paper containing an overall review of maritime for regulating further growth of the aquaculture safety and the preparedness and response system industry, and will continue its work in line with the for acute pollution. Storting’s decisions during its consideration of the Norway’s National Transport Plan 2014–2023 white paper on predictable and environmentally states that the principles set out in the Nature sustainable growth of Norwegian salmon and Diversity Act must be followed when planning, trout farming (Meld. St. 16 (2014–2015)). constructing and operating transport infrastruc- ture. Large-scale developments often require an environmental impact assessment, which must Petroleum activities include a description of potential impacts on biodi- Environmental considerations are an integral part versity. of Norwegian petroleum activities. Shipping in polar waters, as in other parts of To protect marine ecosystems from pressures the world, is subject to the rules of international and impacts associated with the oil and gas indus- conventions adopted by the International Mari- try, impact assessments under the Petroleum time Organization (IMO). The Polar Code, which Activities Act are required both before new areas was adopted by IMO in 2014, is a mandatory inter- are opened for petroleum activity, and before spe- national code of safety for ships operating in polar cific field development projects. Impact assess- waters. The Code consists of two parts, one on ments are also required before pipeline- and safety and one on environment-related . It 28 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life sets specific requirements for ships operating in water, and these may displace native organisms. polar waters, for example on ship design, equip- Climate change means that the risk that such ment, operations, environmental protection, navi- organisms will become established is rising. Nor- gation and crew qualifications. The most impor- way regulates ballast water management through tant environment-related provisions deal with pol- its national Ballast Water Regulations, which lution by oil, chemicals, sewage and garbage entered into force in 2009. The regulations will be released from ships. The Polar Code enters into revised once the Ballast Water Convention has force on 1 January 2017. entered into force, which is expected to happen in Norway’s Act relating to ports and navigable the near future. waters is intended to facilitate safe and unimpeded The Government will give priority to efforts to passage and sound use and management of navi- contain and control the Pacific oyster in accord- gable waters in accordance with the public inter- ance with the forthcoming action plan for the spe- est. The public interest includes biodiversity con- cies. The Government will continue the current siderations. These must be taken into account management approach for red king crab, which is when considering applications for permits for to regulate the commercial fishery in the eastern works under the Act. ‘Works’ in this connection part of its distribution area in Norway and encour- include quays, bridges, aquaculture facilities, age harvesting of all sizes of crabs to control the cables, pipelines, dredging and dumping. The Act species further west. also includes provisions on the use of navigable waters, aids to navigation and port activities. Plastic waste Sound waste management is essential for prevent- Invasive alien organisms ing marine litter. Dumping of waste is forbidden, There is a high risk of the introduction of alien and there are requirements to search for and organisms when ships discharge untreated ballast report lost fishing gear. The Government has rein-

Figure 5.6 The Pacific oyster is an alien species in Norway, and there is a high risk that it will have nega- tive impacts on Norwegian coastal ecosystems. The Government will give priority to efforts to contain and control the species. Photo: Kim Abel/Naturarkivet 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 29 Nature for life forced efforts at both national and international be minimised. Before any mineral activities can be level to prevent littering of coastal and marine permitted on the continental shelf, the knowledge areas, and to build up knowledge about the base, including knowledge of environmental sources of litter, its impacts and possible action impacts, must be improved and sound legislation against marine litter and microplastics. More sup- must be in place. port has been made available for voluntary beach clean-up campaigns. A producer responsibility scheme for leisure craft is being considered, and Offshore energy in 2016 the Norwegian Environment Agency is to The Offshore Energy Act entered into force on 1 present a review of other effective national action July 2010. Under the Act, offshore renewable to deal with marine litter. The Agency will also energy production may only be established after publish an assessment of possible measures to the public authorities have opened specific geo- reduce and prevent microplastic pollution of the graphical areas for licence applications. Before an marine environment. A cooperation project has area can be opened for offshore power devel- been started in which fishermen can enter into a opment, the Act also requires the central govern- voluntary agreement with the Environment ment authorities to carry out a strategic environ- Agency allowing them to deliver waste they mental assessment (SEA). One important purpose retrieve during fishing operations free of charge of drawing up the Offshore Energy Act was to in port. The waste is then registered and as much ensure that a framework was in place well before as possible of it is recycled. The scheme currently any developments started and to maintain control applies to four Norwegian ports, and the data col- of spatial planning offshore. lected will be used in identifying solutions to the As part of the implementation of the Act, a problem of marine litter. The Directorate of Fish- working group led by the Norwegian Water eries will continue to run its annual retrieval pro- Resources and Energy Directorate identified gramme for lost fishing gear. The authorities also areas it considered to be suitable for wind power. intend to complete the work of removing aban- The Directorate then conducted an SEA for these doned mussel cultivation facilities. Norway will areas, which was submitted to the Ministry of continue to play an active part in international Petroleum and Energy in 2013. The SEA was com- efforts, mainly organised by the UN Environment prehensive, and included an evaluation of environ- Assembly (UNEA), the UN Environment Pro- mental, economic and business interests associ- gramme (UNEP), the UN Food and Agriculture ated with the areas and their suitability in techno- Organization (FAO), the Convention for the Pro- logical and economic terms. The Directorate con- tection of the Marine Environment of the North- cluded that five areas should be given priority for East Atlantic (the OSPAR Convention) and the wind power developments. None of these has as North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission yet been opened. Under the Offshore Energy Act, (NEAFC), to reduce the quantities of plastic waste environmental impact assessments must be con- and microplastics in the marine environment, ducted in connection with licence applications, build up knowledge about microplastics and pre- and detailed plans for each project must be drawn vent losses and ensure retrieval of fishing gear. up.

The mineral industry 5.5.2 Rivers and lakes In recent years, the mineral industry has shown growing interest in potential mineral deposits on Integrated management the Norwegian continental shelf. The knowledge Cross-sectoral cooperation on water management base is inadequate at present, and mapping and under the Water Management Regulations (which surveys are therefore the key activities. It will be incorporate the Water Framework Directive into some time before any commercial extraction of Norwegian law) is an important tool for achieving minerals can be started, and this would require good ecological status in Norway’s rivers and more knowledge about the resource base, extrac- lakes. The management plans for river basin dis- tion methods, coexistence with other industries, tricts include environmental objectives for water and benthic species and habitats. Unless precau- bodies and programmes of measures. tions are taken, activities on the seabed can dam- The measures included in the river basin man- age rare and vulnerable species and habitats. The agement plans drawn up for the period 2016–2021 permanent footprint of mineral extraction should are to be operational in 2018 at the latest, so that it 30 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life is possible to achieve the national target of good may lay down necessary conditions for such ecological status by 2021. This has involved coop- works. Hydropower developments have brought eration between sectors to put together sets of about the greatest physical disturbance of Nor- measures to reduce negative impacts and achieve way’s river systems, but are also the backbone of environmental objectives. Further work will be the Norwegian electricity system and of vital carried out on the impacts of salmon lice and importance to people’s welfare. escaped farmed fish on wild salmon stocks. The As a general rule, a licence is required to con- Government will ensure the coordination of struct and operate a new hydropower installation. efforts by all relevant sectors to put the pro- However, small-scale installations are generally grammes of measures set out in the river basin exempt from the licensing requirement and are management plans into operation so that the envi- dealt with under the Planning and Building Act. ronmental objectives can be met. Decisions on the Licences contain conditions relating to nature implementation of specific measures will be taken management and mitigation measures. The flow by the competent authority in each case under the dynamics and variation in water flow are generally relevant legislation. key to the value of a river system as a landscape element and for and biodiver- sity. Licences therefore frequently include a Planning for river systems and adjacent areas requirement to maintain a minimum water dis- According to section 1–8 of the Planning and charge, or environmental flow, in order to main- Building Act, the natural and cultural environ- tain more of the connectivity and flow dynamics of ment, outdoor recreation, landscape and other the river channel. public interests in the 100-metre belt along the During licensing processes, the water shoreline and along rivers and lakes must be resources authorities will attach special impor- given special consideration in planning processes. tance to adjusting flow regimes to maintain the The same section also requires municipalities to of river systems in the best possible way. consider whether developments that will have a This applies both during licensing of new hydro- negative impact on the environment should be power installations and procedures to alter the specifically prohibited in this belt. Most munici- conditions for operation of existing installations. palities have now introduced a prohibition against The use of measures to improve ecological status building along rivers and lakes. The Government that will limit power production must be consid- considers it vital that municipalities and county ered on the basis of an overall cost-benefit assess- authorities are aware of the importance of differ- ment of the effects on public and private interests. ent ecosystems in climate change adaptation. For The competent authorities include standard example, riparian ecosystems and floodplains can conditions, including conditions relating to nature moderate the impacts of flooding, and should be management, in all new licences for hydropower retained as far as possible in planning processes. installations. The conditions relating to nature Section 11 of the Water Resources Act gives the management have been developed through expe- municipalities the authority to determine the mini- rience of river system management, and make it mum breadth of the natural vegetation belt to be possible to require licensees to investigate the maintained along river systems to counteract run- impacts of hydropower production on the ecology off and provide a habitat for plants and animals. of river systems, and to take certain steps to The Ministry of Climate and Environment, in con- reduce the adverse impacts of developments, for sultation with the Ministry of Petroleum and example replenishing spawning gravel or remov- Energy and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, ing barriers to fish migration. will ensure that the municipalities receive advice Requiring licensees to investigate the long- on how to apply this provision. term environmental impacts of hydropower devel- opments makes it possible to identify whether fur- ther mitigation measures are needed. The authori- Works in river systems ties can also use the accumulated knowledge and River systems are an essential and characteristic experience of the impacts of earlier hydropower element of Norwegian nature, and also an impor- developments in determining the conditions that tant source of . The legislation should be included in new licences. Furthermore, on river systems makes licences mandatory for all this knowledge and experience will provide a bet- works in river systems that may significantly ter basis for assessing the cumulative environ- affect public interests. The competent authority mental effects if new developments are permitted. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 31 Nature for life

The Government intends to make more active study of all river systems where revision of hydro- use of the standard nature management condi- power licences can be started by 2022, covering tions to improve ecological status in river systems about 395 licences in 187 river systems. The where there are hydropower developments. report assesses the environmental qualities that The Norwegian river basin management plans can be maintained through cost-effective meas- point out that many of the current licences for ures that will involve some reduction in electricity hydropower developments lack the standard production. The two agencies recommend giving nature management conditions. high priority to 50 river systems where they iden- It is true that about half of all current hydro- tified a high potential for significant improve- power licences lack the standard nature manage- ments in ecological status with only a small or ment conditions, which have only been included moderate estimated loss in power production. On in all new licences since 1992. However, there is the basis of an overall national cost-benefit analy- legal provision for requiring improvements of eco- sis, the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy and the logical status, even though the older licences do Ministry of Climate and Environment have not include the modern nature management con- instructed the river basin district authorities that ditions. The water resources legislation provides as a general rule, requirements relating to mini- for the licensing authority to revise the conditions mum flow and/or water levels in regulation reser- for licences after a certain number of years, pro- voirs are only to be used as a basis for achieving vided that certain requirements are met. This pro- environmental objectives in the 50 high-priority vides a tool for modernising the conditions in river systems. licences to bring them more closely into line with A good many hydropower licences will be current environmental standards. It is possible to revised during the first management cycle for incorporate the standard nature management con- Norway’s river basin districts. During this period, ditions when licences are revised, and subse- it may also be appropriate to require measures to quently to require the licensee to take action to improve ecological status in river systems other improve ecological status or to carry out investi- than the 50 high-priority river systems. This can gations to allow an evaluation of which measures be done by applying the standard nature manage- are needed. The problem is that a revision pro- ment conditions, requiring licensing of older cess can be very time-consuming and resource- hydropower developments (some of these have intensive, and that measures to improve ecologi- never had licences, see the next paragraph), or cal status are needed in many areas affected by amending individual conditions in certain hydro- older hydropower developments. The scale of the power licences. The Government expects sparing administrative resources required means that it use to be made of proposals to require licensing of may take a long time to achieve the environmental previously unlicensed developments or to amend objectives for rivers where there are older hydro- conditions in licences in a way that would reduce power developments. electricity production. If the competent authorities The Government will review more efficient for the river basin districts nevertheless consider ways of making the standard nature management that water flow requirements should be given pri- conditions or other effective instruments applica- ority in some of these river systems, they must ble, in the first instance to river systems regulated provide grounds for their conclusions in the man- by hydropower licences where there are known to agement plans. A new cost-benefit analysis must be environmental problems. This will be done be made during the second management cycle with a view to requiring action to achieve the (2022–2027). nationally approved environmental objectives in There are still some older hydropower devel- the river basin management plans for the period opments for which no licences have ever been 2016–2022. issued. In special cases, the authorities have the Within certain limits, the energy authorities legal power to require licensing of such develop- can through a revision process require measures ments. The authorities will assess on a case-by- to improve ecological status that will affect power case basis whether to use such processes as an production, for example requirements to maintain opportunity to improve the ecological status of a minimum water discharge. This cannot be done river systems if there are strong environmental using the standard nature management condi- grounds for doing so. In such cases, the standard tions. The Norwegian Water Resources and nature management conditions will be included Energy Directorate and the Norwegian Environ- during the licensing process. A better overview is ment Agency have carried out a joint screening needed of unlicensed hydropower developments, 32 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life including hydropower plants, and where they are mainly by treating rivers with rotenone. As of 1 located. The Ministry of Petroleum and Energy July 2015, the parasite had been eradicated from a and the Ministry of Climate and Environment will total of 22 infected river systems. Treatment of a together survey unlicensed developments and further 17 river systems had been completed, and draw up an overview. it is hoped that they can be declared free of the There may also be other grounds than parasite within the next five years. improvement of ecological status for operational Although for many salmon stocks, fishing is adjustments or altering conditions in licences, for not the main threat, regulating fishing in rivers example relating to landscape considerations or and the sea helps to reduce the overall pressure outdoor recreation interests. Revision of licences on wild salmon and thus ensure the survival of and other tools provided by the water resources certain stocks New regulatory measures for fish- legislation can also be used to achieve improve- ing for anadromous salmonids will be introduced ments for these interests. River systems that are in 2016. These will focus on sustainability and protected against hydropower developments are value creation. The Government is also seeking to discussed in Chapter 7.3. ensure that fishing in the Tana river system is sus- tainable from 2017 onwards. Cooperation with Russia on the management of wild salmon in the Management of wild salmonids Finnmark and Murmansk region will be followed Norway bases its management of wild salmon up in accordance with a memorandum of under- stocks on international management principles standing between Norway and Russia. adopted by the North Atlantic Salmon Conserva- The Government will continue to make use of tion Organization (NASCO) and on a policy docu- gene banks to safeguard the genetic diversity of ment on the protection of wild Atlantic salmon salmon and sea trout stocks and to safeguard (Proposition No. 32 (2006–2007) to the Storting). stocks that are threatened by Gyrodactylus salaris. Norway’s objective is to maintain and rebuild However, the Government’s long-term aim is to be salmon stocks of a size and composition that safe- able to restock the rivers from which these stocks guards the genetic diversity of the species and originate, and for the stocks to be able to survive makes full use of the productive capacity of in the wild. salmon habitat. The Government will continue the liming pro- The system of national salmon rivers and gramme for rivers and lakes to counteract the fjords gives about three-quarters of Norway’s effects of acid rain. Liming improves conditions overall salmon resources special protection in not only for wild salmon, but also for biodiversity selected river systems and fjords. This system is in general. There are now 21 salmon rivers in the to be evaluated in 2017. If it is not considered to be liming programme, and after many years, a large providing adequate protection for wild salmon, the number of salmon stocks have recovered. Of the Government will assess the need to provide wild salmon caught in Norway, 10–15 % are now stronger protection against the effects of human from rivers that are in the liming programme. activity. Action to reduce the negative impacts of The quality norms for wild salmon lay down salmon lice and escaped farmed fish is discussed guidelines for management objectives for salmon in the section on aquaculture in Chapter 5.5.1. stocks. They clarify what is meant by ‘good status’ for a wild salmon stock. The Ministry of Climate and Environment will ensure that the classifica- Regulation of pollution tion of the most important salmon stocks in Section 8 of the Pollution Control Act states that accordance with the norms is continued. If some ordinary pollution from agriculture is permitted stocks do not meet the criteria for good status in unless otherwise specified in regulations issued accordance with the norms, and there are no under section 9 of the Act. Regulations on the stor- exemptions from the requirements in or under age and use of fertiliser products of organic origin the norms, the Ministry will, in consultation with have been adopted to prevent pollution and to pro- the relevant authorities, seek to clarify why good mote sustainable management and ensure status has not been achieved and draw up a plan that biodiversity concerns are taken into account for how the norms can be achieved. when they are used. The Government is revising The Government will continue efforts to eradi- these regulations, and one of the aims is to reduce cate the salmon parasite Gyrodactylus salaris from pressure on water bodies in agricultural areas. river systems in accordance with scientific advice, 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 33 Nature for life

Some pharmaceuticals that pose a significant Many wetlands are still under considerable risk to the environment have been included on a pressure, although the situation has improved in Watch List under the Water Framework Directive. some respects in recent years. Because of the All the EU member states are required to monitor importance of wetlands for biodiversity and car- the concentrations of these substances in water bon storage and their potential importance in bodies. In addition, the environmental effects of flood control and drought mitigation, the Govern- pharmaceuticals are considered when making ment will intensify efforts to improve the ecologi- decisions on whether to grant marketing authori- cal status of priority areas so that remaining wet- sation for their use in veterinary medicines. Waste lands are safeguarded. water treatment plants are not designed to remove Internationally, the importance of wetlands pharmaceuticals. Because of the environmental has been recognised for many years, and the damage that pharmaceuticals can cause, it is Ramsar Convention provides a global framework important to inform the public about how to dis- for the conservation and wise use of wetlands. pose of unused medicines. The Ministry of Health The 168 countries that are parties to the conven- and Care Services has therefore asked the Nor- tion have drawn up a fourth strategic plan for the wegian Medicines Agency, together with the phar- period 2016–2024 that each country is expected macies and the pharmaceutical industry, to inform to implement. Norway is doing so as part of the the public about the pharmacies’ take-back action plan in the present white paper. The conser- scheme for unused medicines. vation and sustainable use of peatlands was one of the topics discussed at the 12th Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention in June 2015. A Alien organisms resolution adopted at the conference encourages The new Regulations relating to alien organisms all countries to limit ‘activities that lead to drain- (in force from 1 January 2016) introduce a age of peatlands and may cause subsidence, flood- requirement to hold a permit for the import or ing and the emission of greenhouse gases.’ The release of a long list of aquatic plants and other Nordic countries played an active part in the adop- organisms. Steps to deal with alien fish species tion of this resolution, and the Nordic environ- will be based on these regulations and on a forth- ment ministers have agreed to join forces to coming action plan for combating alien exotic fish strengthen efforts for the conservation and resto- species. Action to contain and control Canadian ration of peatlands. pondweed and Nuttall’s pondweed will also be The Government will ensure that the values organised within the framework of the action plan and benefits associated with wetlands, including for the two species. peatlands, are given greater weight in the applica- tion of sectoral legislation and the Planning and Building Act. This will include providing better 5.5.3 Wetlands guidance on the importance of incorporating the values and benefits associated with wetlands, Introduction including peatlands, into municipal land-use plan- One element of the Government’s policy for sus- ning, and how this can be done. The Government tainable use and good ecological status in wet- will also encourage municipalities to use natural lands is its follow-up of a request from the Storting flood control, including maintenance and restora- dated 2 June 2015. The Storting decided to send tion of riverbank, and ecotone vegetation, this request in connection with a debate on pro- as an integral part of their climate change adapta- posals for integrated long-term management of tion work. The official Government expectations peatlands in Norway. The Government was asked for regional and municipal planning make it clear to assess relevant issues relating to the manage- that municipalities and county authorities need to ment of peatlands in its white paper on Norway’s be aware of the importance of different ecosys- biodiversity action plan and in white papers on tems for climate change adaptation. This also agriculture and on the forestry and wood indus- applies to the county governors, whose responsi- try. bilities include providing guidance for the munici- Threatened species and habitat types associ- palities in climate change adaptation. Ecosystems ated with wetlands, and action to protect them, are such as wetlands, river banks and forest can mod- discussed in Chapter 6.4.3, and measures to erate the impacts of climate change, and their con- ensure conservation of a representative selection servation should therefore be included in land-use of wetlands are discussed in Chapter 7.3.3. planning processes. The Government expects 34 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life municipalities and county authorities to take par- already existing ditches may be cleared. In certain ticular note of natural and future climate areas, it may be necessary to maintain old ditches change, and to identify important values associ- so that timber production does not decline. How- ated with biodiversity and maintain them through ever, clearing old, more or less blocked ditches in regional and municipal planning. It is important to areas where no productive forest has been estab- keep track of developments, and the Government lished can dry out active peatland and swamp for- will therefore ensure that the municipalities ests. The Government intends to revise the regu- report on permits for land-use change in wetland lations on sustainable forestry to prohibit both the areas in the same way as for cultivation of new construction of new drainage ditches and clearing areas. If important public interests make it neces- of old ditches in areas where no productive forest sary to allow developments on peatland, exca- has been established. This will be further dis- vated material should as far as is practicable be cussed in a forthcoming white paper on forestry used in the restoration of other peatlands. from the Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

Use of peat Regulations on new cultivation of land Norwegian potting soil may contain a high propor- The updated cross-party agreement on climate tion of peat extracted from peatland, often policy from 2012 includes a decision to revise the imported from other European countries. Peat regulations on new cultivation of land to reflect cli- extraction damages plant and animal habitats and mate change considerations. The Government is results in greenhouse gas emissions. Industrial considering how to do this, and will among other peat extraction is one of the major pressures that things commission a review of the impacts of vari- is causing degradation of peatlands internation- ous measures relating to new cultivation of peat- ally. It is therefore important to make consumers land, focusing on their mitigation effect and cost. aware that it is possible to use soil that does not The option of prohibiting new cultivation in peat- contain peat for . The Government will land areas will also be considered. The Govern- consider requiring producers to provide clear ment will hold a public consultation process on labelling of the contents of soil products. The the proposed amendments to the regulations after need for soil improvers and growth media could in the review has been published. principle be met by using other renewable resources. However, phasing out peat may result in more use of replacements, for example Restoration of wetlands imported coir (coconut fibre). It is important to Peatland restoration improves ecological status, ensure that switching to other products will result and will also improve and increase the areas of in a real environmental improvement. The Gov- suitable habitat for many threatened species. Peat- ernment will therefore review the consequences land restoration, together with improvements of of phasing out the use of peat more thoroughly. ecological status as required by the river basin In June 2015, the Storting debated proposals management plans, is the Government’s most for integrated long-term management of peatlands important approach to implementing the interna- in Norway, and decided to request the Govern- tional target of restoring at least 15 % of degraded ment to amend Norway’s regulations on environ- ecosystems. mental impact assessment (EIA) as soon as possi- According to the Intergovernmental Panel on ble to make an EIA mandatory for peat extraction Climate Change (IPCC), peatland restoration is projects below the current limits, i.e. total volume one of the most cost-effective ways of reducing extracted less than 2 million m3 or site surface greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural area less than 150 hectares. This issue will be fur- sector globally. A 2010 report on measures and ther reviewed during the revision of the Norwe- instruments for achieving Norway’s climate tar- gian regulations to bring them into line with the gets by 2020 (Climate Cure 2020) also found this revised EU Directive 2014/52. The deadline for to be a cost-effective measure, with an estimated implementing the directive is spring 2017. price of NOK 168 per tonne CO2. Restoration of peatlands and other wetlands can also be a useful climate change adaptation measure. Intact wet- Sustainable forestry to safeguard wetlands lands, particularly those that are fed by rivers, can The construction of new drainage ditches in con- provide protection against destructive flooding. In nection with forestry operations is forbidden, but addition, they can reduce the impacts of drought. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 35 Nature for life

Restored peatlands can start to build up a peat standard, so that more biomass can be harvested layer again and thus store more carbon. However, from Norwegian forests while at the same time this is a very slow process. When peatlands are maintaining biodiversity. This will be discussed first rewetted, emissions will increase. further in the forthcoming white paper on for- However, in the long term a net increase in carbon estry policy from the Ministry of Agriculture and storage is expected. Food. In 2015, the Ministry of Climate and Environ- ment started a three-year pilot project on peatland restoration. The aims for the sites that are Regulations on sustainable forestry included are to stop greenhouse gas emissions, Regulations on sustainable forestry under the For- enhance their role in climate change adaptation estry Act are Norway’s key legislation for manag- and improve ecological status. Most of the locali- ing forest areas that do not have statutory protec- ties included in the pilot project are within pro- tion. The Government considers that any intensifi- tected areas. At the same time, a project for river cation of forestry involving an increase in timber system and wetland/peatland restoration was harvesting should be combined with stronger established by a committee of directorates under environmental measures in forestry. The Govern- the Water Management Regulations to ensure the ment will discuss this further in a forthcoming necessary cooperation and coordination of initia- white paper on forestry policy. tives in these areas. It is intended to facilitate the implementation of Norwegian restoration initia- tives, encourage the exchange of information and Grant scheme for forestry management plans and experience, and assess possible mechanisms for environmental inventories closer coordination of planning and funding of For many years, the Ministry of Agriculture and projects where authorities from several sectors Food has provided grants for forest owners who are involved. draw up forestry management plans for their As part of its efforts to strengthen the national properties. Landowners generally engage private cross-party agreement on climate policy, the Gov- companies to obtain the necessary information ernment will draw up a plan for expanding restora- and draw up the plans, and often many forest own- tion initiatives for peatlands and other wetlands as ers in the same area will commission forestry a climate policy measure in the period 2016–2020. management plans at the same time, so that data Restoration will be organised so that projects play collection takes place over a larger area. a part in achieving the Government’s goals for cli- Since 1990, it has been a condition for award- mate change mitigation and adaptation and for ing grants that forestry management plans also improvements in ecological status. The Norwe- include information on important environmental gian Environment Agency and the Norwegian features of the forest property. Since 2000, there Agricultural Agency are responsible for drawing has been a requirement to record important habi- up the plan, which is to be completed in the tats for red-listed species according to a specified course of 2016. method (known as environmental inventories in forest) on the basis of research on red-listed spe- cies and their habitat requirements. Environmen- 5.5.4 Forest tal information acquired in this way provides a in Norway is strongly influ- basis for environmental measures carried out enced by the forestry legislation and the way it is done by the owners, and in addition the informa- applied in practice. tion from environmental inventories often pro- vides a basis for voluntary protection of forest. By 2015, about 70 000 areas covering a total Strengthening environmental concerns in forestry area of about 750 square kilometres had been As announced in the 2011 white paper on agricul- identified through environmental inventories and tural, forestry and food policy, the Government set aside as key biotopes that are not to be felled. will give greater weight to environmental con- This corresponds to almost 1 % of the total area of cerns in forestry by making use of the instru- productive forest. Since environmental invento- ments introduced in the Nature Diversity Act and ries have not yet been carried out for all forest policy instruments for the forestry sector, includ- properties, the proportion of productive forest set ing environmental inventories, knowledge devel- aside as key biotopes is expected to increase. opment and application of the Norwegian PEFC 36 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

species is regulated by the Regulations relating to Regulations relating to the planning and approval of the release of foreign tree species for forestry pur- forestry and farm roads poses under the Nature Diversity Act. The Minis- Norway adopted new regulations on the planning try of Climate and Environment will continue to and approval of forestry and farm roads in May administer the regulations, and will in consulta- 2015. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food will tion with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food issue a circular on the regulations describing how revise the guidelines on the regulations and pub- to proceed if applications are received for the con- lish a new edition. Another aim is to simplify struction of forestry roads where subsequent log- administrative procedures for planting foreign ging may damage forest areas of high conserva- tree species that are to be used as Christmas tion value. The intention is to ensure that the envi- trees. In such cases, it may be appropriate to ronmental authorities, in consultation with the for- require notification rather than an application for a estry authorities, investigate whether protection permit. In this context, there will be a focus on on a voluntary basis is a possibility in such cases. control of the spread of foreign tree species. If the forest owner is interested in protection on a The spread of foreign tree species from sites voluntary basis, the necessary procedures will be where they have been planted earlier can also be a started. If not, the application for road construc- problem, particularly in protected areas. The tion will be processed in the normal way in administrative authorities for these areas will play accordance with the regulations. an important role in containing and controlling the undesirable spread of foreign tree species, see Chapter 7.2 on management of protected areas. Management of forest cervids The Government will discuss appropriate meas- Moose, roe deer and red deer are the cervids that ures to be used outside protected areas in the are mainly associated with forests in Norway. The forthcoming white paper on forestry policy. fallow deer is an alien species, and is found in Øst- fold county. The Nature Diversity Act and the Wildlife Act and regulations under these acts pro- 5.5.5 Cultural landscapes vide the general framework for cervid manage- The Government’s position is that it is neither pos- ment in Norway. The specific regulations on the sible nor desirable to revert to the agricultural management of cervids are of key importance. techniques that were common fifty years ago. They require the municipalities to determine Nevertheless, action to maintain the ecological objectives for stocks of moose, red deer and roe status of areas of cultural landscape is important. deer in areas where hunting is permitted. The The environmental programmes and grant Government considers it important to organise schemes in the agricultural sector are intended to cervid management locally. reduce pressures and impacts associated with Cervid populations in Norway have grown agriculture and to maintain the cultural landscape. strongly after the Second World War. Moose A number of them also result in improvements in stocks have for a time been too large for the avail- agricultural practices and boost production. Most able grazing resources in parts of the southern of the environmental grant schemes in the agricul- half of Norway. Grazing damage as a result of tural sector are part of the Agricultural Agree- record-high cervid densities is costly for the for- ment between the state and the farmers, and are estry industry. Large populations of cervids also organised in environmental programmes at have a negative effect on traffic safety because the national, regional and municipal level. The risk of deer-vehicle collisions rises. The Ministry national environmental programme provides a of Climate and Environment will encourage steps central framework and national goals and includes to make information on cervids available to user key grant schemes for the whole country. The groups and promote knowledge-based manage- regional environmental programmes include ment of cervid populations to minimise negative grant schemes at county level, adapted to the envi- density-related effects such as grazing damage ronmental situation in different parts of the coun- and deer-vehicle collisions. try, and the scheme for specific environmental measures in agriculture is organised at municipal level. A considerable proportion of the funding Invasive alien organisms provided through these schemes is allocated to Foreign tree species can have negative impacts on cultural landscape projects. Funding for projects native biodiversity. Planting and sowing of such 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 37 Nature for life

alien organisms from becoming a threat to valua- ble biodiversity.

5.5.6 Mountains The ecological status of Norway’s mountain eco- systems varies. Land conversion and land-use change (for example the construction of holiday cabins and infrastructure for water and wind power) and climate change are expected to put more pressure on mountain ecosystems in the time ahead. It is particularly mountain areas near Norway’s larger towns that are under pressure, as visitor numbers are increasing and holiday cabins are being built together with access roads and other infrastructure. On the other hand, mountain areas account for a large proportion of the total protected area in Norway. Protected areas and their management are discussed in Chapter 7. The most important instrument for land-use planning in mountain areas and for ensuring sus- tainable development outside protected areas up to 2020 is the Planning and Building Act, com- Figure 5.7 Active and targeted management is bined with the principles of environmental law set needed to maintain biodiversity in cultural out in the Nature Diversity Act. The Government landscapes. The effects of grazing vary between expects the Planning and Building Act to be used to ensure sound land-use management and to species and breeds of livestock because of differences in their feeding preferences. Sheep strike a good balance in cases where there are and goats keep down shrubs, benefiting species conflicts of interest in mountain areas generally, that are threatened by overgrowing of open and particularly in the buffer zones outside pro- landscapes. tected areas. In 2007, to safeguard wild reindeer habitat and Photo: Jan O. Kiese ensure sustainable development in mountain areas that support wild reindeer, the Ministry of in a set of selected agricultural landscapes and for Climate and Environment set up a programme to cultural landscapes that are World Heritage Sites draw up regional plans for integrated manage- is being used to maintain farming activities and ment of mountain areas that are particularly improve coordination of the management and important for the survival of wild reindeer in Nor- maintenance of some particularly valuable areas. way (10 national conservation areas have been The Government will continue to use both agricul- designated). The Government will use the tural and environmental policy instruments that regional reindeer management plans as a basis for encourage use and active management of the agri- safeguarding wild reindeer and their habitat in cultural landscape. This helps to counteract the connection with development projects and in negative trends that are affecting cultural land- municipal land-use planning, and to ensure an scapes – overgrowing of open areas with trees and integrated approach across municipal and county scrub, and abandonment of previously farmed boundaries. The regional management plans must areas. Support for cultural landscape projects be followed up with action plans and implementa- under the environmental programmes, selected tion in relevant municipal master plans. We have a cultural landscapes and the World Heritage sites sound knowledge of wild reindeer stocks, based will be continued as appropriate. on the and ecology of wild reindeer, but The Ministry of Transport and Communica- there is disagreement on the cumulative environ- tions will continue its efforts relating to alien mental effects of all projects and developments in organisms by integrating this work into relevant wild reindeer habitat. To clarify what the manage- construction, operation and maintenance projects ment objectives for species set out in the Nature for transport infrastructure. The aim is to prevent Diversity Act mean in practice for wild reindeer 38 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life and identify which developments have positive or for Svalbard to a changing climate and a possible negative impacts on wild reindeer, the Govern- increase in the activity level. ment will consider whether to develop a quality The comprehensive protection regime and norm for the species. Application of a quality strict environmental rules set out in the Svalbard norm could also strengthen the common knowl- Environmental Protection Act and regulations edge base for wild reindeer management. under the Act are a good starting point for dealing with challenges that may arise in the future, because intact ecosystems in themselves make 5.5.7 Polar ecosystems nature more resilient to the impacts of climate The polar regions are particularly vulnerable to a change. It is therefore important to maintain the changing climate, and ecological status in these current protection regime. areas is increasingly being determined by climate Important measures have already been intro- change and other external pressures such as duced in Svalbard in response to the decline in the ocean acidification and long-range transport of extent of the sea , which has made some areas pollution. There is also increasing activity in Sval- more accessible and exposed vulnerable species bard and the northern parts of the Barents Sea. and habitats to more traffic and human activity. The expansion of activities and industries includ- For example, ships sailing within the protected ing research, education, tourism and space- areas of Svalbard (which cover most of the territo- related activity in Svalbard is expected to con- rial waters) are now prohibited from carrying tinue. This is likely to result in more traffic and heavy bunker oil. activity, and create new challenges for the authori- The Government will in the time ahead ties. strengthen measures to safeguard species and Norway’s environmental targets for Svalbard habitats that may come under increasing pressure are particularly ambitious. The aim is to retain the as a result of climate change and ocean acidifica- extent of -like areas and maintain the tion combined with other environmental pres- biological and landscape diversity virtually sures. In the case of climate change, this applies untouched by local human activity. The value of especially to species that are heavily dependent on protected areas as reference areas for research ice-covered areas of sea, such as the polar bear will be safeguarded. and Arctic seals, since their distribution may The Svalbard Environmental Protection Act, change considerably and become much more together with regulations under the Act, is the restricted. A changing climate may result in con- most important instrument for ensuring that the siderable shifts in habitat ranges, and human traf- local management regime for Svalbard maintains fic and activities may spread to new areas. good ecological status in the ’s ecosys- Another factor it may be necessary to consider is tems. Subject to the limitations imposed by inter- the increasing isolation and consequent vulnera- national law, the Act applies to the entire land area bility of some species and populations as the loss of Svalbard and its waters out to the territorial of sea ice weakens links between the islands limit. In most cases, it lays down special provi- within Svalbard and between Svalbard and Arctic sions on environmental protection in Svalbard islands and mainland areas further east, such as rather than making the mainland legislation appli- Franz Josef Land and Novaya Zemlya. These con- cable. Its purpose is to preserve a virtually siderations must be incorporated into species and untouched environment in Svalbard with respect habitat management in Svalbard, and also mean to continuous areas of wilderness, landscape, that it is vital to develop and update the knowl- flora, fauna and cultural heritage. Within this edge base for the public administration. framework, it allows for environmentally sound The ecosystems in the northern part of the settlement, research and commercial activities. Barents Sea and the northwestern parts of the The Act and its regulations govern most areas of Norwegian Sea are included in the management environmental protection in Svalbard, including plans for these sea areas. The marginal ice zone, protected areas, activities that may have an envi- the polar front and areas near Jan Mayen have ronmental impact, access and passage, protection been identified as particularly valuable and vulner- of the cultural heritage, land-use planning in the able areas and delimited on the maps in the man- settlements, local pollution and waste manage- agement plans. Additionally, in the management ment, and hunting and fishing. The Government plan for the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, the polar will continue to apply this strict legislation and use front and the sea areas surrounding Svalbard are it as a tool for adapting the management regime identified and described as particularly valuable 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 39 Nature for life and vulnerable areas, but only the area around Monitoring in April 2015. It contains updated Bjørnøya has been delimited on maps. The loca- information on the state of the environment, tion of both the marginal ice zone and the polar impacts and pressures, and activities and value front is being influenced by climate change, and creation in the Norwegian Sea, and focuses on sig- both have shifted further northwards. A new nificant changes that have taken place since the assessment of the most appropriate way of delim- previous report was published in 2008. iting the marginal ice zone, polar front and sea The report on the scientific basis refers to the areas surrounding Svalbard as particularly valua- overall conclusion of the 2009 white paper, that ble and vulnerable areas will therefore be made as the state of the Norwegian Sea environment is part of the scientific work leading up to the revi- generally good. However, the white paper also sion of the management plan for the Barents Sea– pointed out that management of the area poses Lofoten area in 2020. The marine management considerable challenges, particularly as regards plans are further discussed in Chapter 5.5.1 on the impacts of climate change and ocean acidifica- marine and coastal waters. tion, overfishing of certain fish stocks, the risk of To ensure sustainable development in the Arc- acute pollution, the decline of seabird populations tic and prevent accidents and harmful releases of and the need to protect coral habitats. The new pollutants, it is vital for the shipping industry to report concludes that the state of the Norwegian maintain high maritime safety and environmental Sea environment is still generally good, and the standards. The recently adopted Polar Code sets management challenges are still much the same. out specific requirements for ships operating in It is difficult to identify any major changes over polar waters, and enters into force on 1 January such a short period of time (2009 to 2014). There 2017. The potential increase in maritime traffic have been no significant changes in activity levels around Svalbard makes it important to ensure a during this period. good oil spill preparedness and response system. The next section provides a brief account of Rapid warming is also weakening the climatic status and trends for the marine environment of barrier to the spread of alien organisms from tem- the Norwegian Sea since the management plan perate waters, and there is a growing risk that was published, as described in the report. such organisms may find a foothold and spread further in Svalbard and the Arctic sea areas. An action plan to prevent the introduction and spread 5.6.2 The marine environment – ecological of invasive alien species in Svalbard has been status and trends in the Norwegian Sea drawn up, and measures to contain, control, eradi- Since 2008, it has been documented that the rising cate and monitor alien species will be imple- CO2 content of the is resulting in mented in line with the priorities set out in the measurable acidification of the in the action plan. Norwegian Sea. It is very uncertain how fast and The Government considers it essential to con- in which ways climate change and ocean acidifica- tinue concerted and coordinated efforts to limit tion will affect the Norwegian Sea environment. cumulative effects as far as possible and maintain Studies have shown that the distribution of many good ecological status in polar ecosystems. benthic organisms has already shifted northwards in response to warmer water. The Norwegian Sea fish community is domi- 5.6 The management plan for the nated by three pelagic species; herring, mackerel Norwegian Sea and blue whiting. The most important changes in fish stocks since 2007 have been the growth of the 5.6.1 Introduction mackerel stock and the expansion of its distribu- The management plan for the Norwegian Sea was tion, the decline in the herring stock after 2009 presented in a white paper in 2009 (Report No. 37 and the decline in the blue whiting stock. How- (2008–2009) to the Storting). The intention was to ever, with strong year classes in 2010 and 2011, update the management plan for the first time in the blue whiting stock was higher in 2013 than in 2014, as was made clear when the Storting consid- the preceding years. ered the white paper. Trends for seabird populations have generally The scientific basis for the management plan remained unchanged after 2008, so that popula- update was published by the Forum for Integrated tions that were showing a declining trend have Marine Management, the Forum on Environmen- continued to decline. tal Risk Management and the Advisory Group on 40 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Figure 5.8 Kittiwakes. Photo: Morten Ekker

Many new finds of coral reefs and sea pen and els of contaminants are largely below the maxi- communities have been made through the mum permitted levels. Seafood from this area is MAREANO programme. Many coral habitats generally considered to be safe. have also been discovered on the continental shelf Releases from the Sellafield processing plant in the Norwegian Sea during studies of the sea- have been reduced, resulting in a reduction in lev- bed in connection with planning of petroleum els of the radioactive substances technetium (Tc- activities. The new information indicates that cor- 99) and strontium (Sr-90) in Norwegian waters. als are more widespread in the Norwegian Sea Other radionuclides that are monitored are show- than was assumed in 2008, but that there are still ing either a slow downward trend or no change. gaps in our knowledge. Through the MAREANO programme, more The results of the monitoring programme for information has been obtained on species and pollutants show that the situation in the Norwe- habitats in several of the particularly valuable and gian Sea is still generally satisfactory, as it was in vulnerable areas identified in the Norwegian Sea 2008.. The main source of pollution is long-range management plan: the Iverryggen reef, the Sula transport with air and ocean currents. Pollutants reef, the Møre banks and the edge of the conti- spread through the entire management plan area, nental shelf. More information has also been as is demonstrated by the fact that measurable obtained on seabirds in the Norwegian Sea concentrations are found even around Jan Mayen. through the seabird programme SEAPOP. The In addition, there are inputs of hazardous sub- new knowledge that has been obtained since the stances from local sources. valuable and vulnerable areas were identified has In some species, hazardous substances have confirmed their value. been found at concentrations above the threshold There is still considerable fisheries activity in levels for adverse effects on individual organisms. the following particularly valuable and vulnerable Surveys have revealed the presence of many new areas: the Møre banks, Halten bank, Sklinna hazardous substances that have not been found bank, Vestfjorden and parts of the edge of the con- previously. Levels of radioactivity in seawater, sed- tinental shelf. In the petroleum sector, the main iments and biota are generally showing a down- change since 2008 is that production licences have ward trend. been awarded for areas closer to several of the val- Results from the seafood safety monitoring uable and vulnerable areas: the Froan archipel- programme in the Norwegian Sea show that lev- ago/Sula reef, the Iverryggen reef, Vestfjorden 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 41 Nature for life and parts of the coastal zone. There has been some exploration drilling along the edge of the Long-range transport of pollutants continental shelf and close to the Sula reef. There In 2008, it was concluded that ocean currents and has been no major change in the volume of ship- atmospheric transport were the most important ping or the areas used by shipping. The introduc- routes for inputs of pollutants to the Norwegian tion of traffic separation schemes off the coast of Sea. Other routes/sources are runoff from land, Western Norway has routed some shipping fur- offshore oil and gas production and shipping. ther away from the coast, particularly near the Since 2008, the models for inputs of pollution have Møre banks. been further developed. More recent calculations show that inputs of hazardous substances via ocean currents and atmospheric transport are 5.6.3 Patterns of activity and pressures and much higher than previously estimated, but it is impacts associated with industrial unlikely that there has been a real increase in activities inputs. The earlier estimates of inputs of polycy- clic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were unrealis- Industrial activities tically low, and new calculations have given values There are currently 16 oil and gas fields in pro- that are about 50 000 times higher for inputs via duction in the Norwegian Sea, as compared with atmospheric transport and about 2400 times 10 in 2008. Oil production from the large fields in higher for inputs via ocean currents. The esti- the area is dropping. In 2008, 16 exploration wells mates for inputs of via ocean currents were drilled; the figures for the years 2009–2012 are also up to 1000 times higher than before. For were 18, 12, 11 and 7 respectively. Thirteen seis- other substances, the changes are considerably mic surveys were carried out in each of the four smaller. Thus, the conclusion from 2008 that years. Discharges of produced water are expected ocean currents and atmospheric transport are the to fall gradually, to about 2/3 of the 2011 level in most important routes has been strengthened. 2025. Ocean currents will transport a substantial pro- There has been little change as regards mari- portion of substances that enter the Norwegian time transport in the Norwegian Sea after 2008. Sea on to other areas, but a certain proportion will Shipping density is highest in the main and sec- also be degraded, stored in or ondary fairways along the coast. A little more than absorbed by living organisms. half of the total distance sailed in both 2008 and 2011 was inside the baseline. The greatest change in traffic patterns is related to the introduction of Marine litter the traffic separation schemes off the coast of Marine litter in the Norwegian Sea largely origi- Western Norway. Oil and chemical tankers and nates further south and is transported with ocean other vessels of gross tonnage 5000 or more fol- currents, but there are also local inputs from low the recommended routes and now sail further sources on land and illegally dumped waste from out from the coast. the fisheries, the offshore industry, shipping and Since 2006, the number of fishing vessels has aquaculture. There is only limited information dropped, but their average size has risen. In 2006, about the quantities of waste in the management there were 7300 registered fishing vessels in the plan area. Norwegian Sea, while in 2011 the number had been reduced to 6252. Fisheries activity is highest in the same areas as before, in shallow bank areas Environmental risk (the Møre, Halten and Sklinna banks), the Sklinn- The potential environmental impacts associated adjupet trough, and along the edge of the conti- with oil spills vary considerably from one part of nental shelf. In 2006, the total catch quantity was the Norwegian Sea to another. The risk of damage 770 000 tonnes, while in 2012 it was 707 000 to the environment and living marine resources tonnes; in the intervening years, catches were caused by acute pollution from the oil and gas somewhat higher, totalling 967 000 tonnes in 2009 fields that are currently producing is for the most for example. The most important commercial fish part considered to be low, because both the proba- stocks are herring, blue whiting, mackerel, saithe, bility of accidental discharges to the sea and the greater argentine and redfish. Almost all of Nor- probability of more serious consequences in the way’s fish stocks are shared with other countries. event of a spill are generally low. Requirements for preventive measures and an emergency prepared- 42 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life ness and response system reduce the level of risk biodiversity, combating pollution, ensuring safe further. seafood and the risk of acute pollution. Since the volume of shipping in the Norwegian The updated scientific basis includes a review Sea is not expected to increase significantly, no of progress towards these goals using monitoring marked increase in the probability of spills from data on indicators, information on measures that shipping is expected. have been implemented and other sources of information.

Overlapping interests and coexistence between industries 5.6.6 Stakeholder participation There has been no increase in conflicts of interest The Forum for Integrated Marine Management has between industries in the period 2008–2012. The established a website (www.havforum.no) to encour- expected level of activity in future suggests that age the exchange of information on marine manage- there will continue to be few conflicts of interest in ment and stakeholder participation in the work. the Norwegian Sea. Stakeholders were given the opportunity to However, an expansion of petroleum activities provide input to the updated scientific basis for in the area, the high level of fishing activity, a cer- the Norwegian Sea management plan. The input tain increase in the volume of shipping and grow- that was received provided valuable supplemen- ing interest in seafood production may create tary information during the process of updating challenges and a greater need for coordinated spa- the scientific basis. tial management. 5.6.7 Further work on the management of 5.6.4 Value creation and its importance for the Norwegian Sea Norwegian society The Government will update the marine manage- Four sectors are particularly important in the Nor- ment plans as needed. An update of a management wegian Sea management plan area – seafood (fish- plan has a more limited scope than revision, dealing ing and aquaculture), petroleum, maritime trans- with a restricted number of issues or part of the geo- port (including freight, coastal routes and tug- graphical area of the management plan. The updated boats) and tourism. According to the updated sci- scientific basis shows that there have been no major entific basis, commercial activities in these sec- changes in ecological status or the use of the Norwe- tors in the management plan area account for gian Sea since the management plan was published about 24 % of national value added within these in 2009. On this basis, the Government does not con- sectors and 19 % of total national employment. The sider it necessary to update the Norwegian Sea man- report describes value creation in the core activi- agement plan at present. The Government has not ties for the different sectors, and in the largest reassessed the framework for petroleum activities, direct deliveries to these core activities. Spin-off but bases its position on its political platform for the effects beyond this have not been assessed and period 2013–2017 and the four-party cooperation quantified, although there is reason to believe that agreement, which state that no petroleum activities they may be considerable. It should also be noted are to be started in the following areas: around Jan that the Norwegian Sea has a value to Norwegian Mayen, the marginal ice zone, the Skagerrak and society beyond value creation in these industries. the Møre banks. The marine management plans are However, no attempt has been made to quantify further discussed in Chapter 5.5.1. the value of ecosystem services from the area that An overall revision of the management plan for are not included in figures for value creation in the each area will be based on a thorough assessment traditional sense. of business development, new knowledge, monitor- ing results and other information on long-term changes in ecosystems. The Government has also 5.6.5 Assessment of progress towards goals announced, most recently in the white paper on the The management plan includes a set of goals for North Sea–Skagerrak management plan (Meld. St. the management of the Norwegian Sea. There are 37 (2012–2013)), that it intends to carry out an both general objectives relating to value creation overall revision of the Norwegian Sea management and coexistence between industries, and more plan in 2025 for the period up to 2040. specific goals concerning the conservation and The Government is basing its work on this sustainable use of the Norwegian Sea, managing timetable. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 43 Nature for life

6 Safeguarding threatened species and habitats

6.1 Introduction great deal of pressure on the environment, cli- mate change may be a significant additional Some of the Aichi targets are specifically intended stressor. The risk of major ecosystem change will to safeguard threatened species and habitats, par- rise if the cumulative environmental effects of all ticularly target 12, which states that ‘by 2020 the pressures become too great. Such changes may extinction of known threatened species has been also have substantial social consequences. Action prevented and their conservation status, particu- to safeguard threatened species and habitats will larly of those most in decline, has been improved reduce the risk of their loss, and thus prevent pos- and sustained’. Norway’s corresponding national sible consequences of their loss that cannot be target is that ‘no species or habitat types will foreseen. become extinct or be lost, and the status of threat- It is also vital to safeguard species and habitats ened and near-threatened species and habitat in order to give future generations the opportu- types will be improved’. The target refers to spe- nity to utilise resources from nature, including cies extinction as a consequence of human activ- those whose potential is currently unknown. ity, which does not exclude the possibility that The Government’s proposals in Chapter 5 of species may be lost as a result of natural pro- this white paper are intended to ensure sustaina- cesses. Moreover, it follows from the manage- ble use and achieve or maintain good ecological ment objectives for species and habitat types in status in Norway’s ecosystems. This is important the Nature Diversity Act that habitat and species for threatened species and habitats as well. How- and their genetic diversity are to be maintained ever, it will often be necessary to take more spe- within their natural ranges. All these goals are par- cific and clearly targeted action in addition to safe- ticularly relevant to threatened species and habi- guard species and habitats that are at serious risk. tats, in other words species and habitats that Nor- International commitments relating to specific way risks losing altogether. Neither the national species or habitats may also mean that Norway is target nor the management objective for species required to take appropriate action. If a significant applies to alien organisms. proportion of the population of a species or the Ecosystems are complex, and we often lack area of habitat type is found in Norway, and action information about the functions of individual spe- in Norway can improve its conservation status cies in an ecosystem and the interactions between globally or at European level, this can also be an them. In many cases, the impacts of species important reason for Norway to take stronger extinction or habitat degradation do not become action. apparent until some time after the damage has In this chapter, the Government proposes been done. On a number of occasions, species measures to safeguard threatened species and extinction or a severe population decline in a par- habitat types. These include both conservation ticular species has proved to have cascading measures to protect species and habitats, and effects on other species in the same ecosystem action to reduce the pressures and impacts associ- and to cause major changes in the ecosystem as a ated with individual developments. Chapters 6.2 whole. This means that there are significant risks and 6.3 describe the Government’s general pro- involved in putting so much pressure on species posals for safeguarding threatened species and and habitats that they at risk of being wiped out. habitat types respectively, while Chapter 6.4 con- Communities and ecosystems have considerable tains more specific proposals for the different adaptive capacity, but it is often impossible to major ecosystems. The Government also sets out know until afterwards whether or not a system general principles for selecting which tools and will adapt successfully to change. instruments to use in Chapters 6.2 and 6.3. Before We know that climate change may result in a decision is made on which tools and instruments rapid changes in ecosystems. If there is already a to use to safeguard a specific threatened species 44 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life or habitat, an assessment of any significant eco- species, and for 78 of these, 25 % or more of the nomic and other effects will be carried out in the European population is believed to be found in normal way, together with a public consultation. Norway. They are mainly plants, fungi and lichens The effects of the action to be taken may vary and a number of insects and arachnids, but they widely depending on what it is intended to safe- also include two fish species (spiny dogfish and guard and what kind of restrictions on use it may golden redfish) and four mammals (hooded seal, involve. After this, the need to safeguard the wolverine, narwhal and bowhead whale). Most of threatened species or habitat, the value of associ- them are associated with forest, cultural land- ated ecosystem services and the effects on other scapes and mountains, and some with wetlands public interests (as specified in section 14 of the and marine and coastal waters. The largest num- Nature Diversity Act) will be weighed against bers of critically endangered and endangered for- each other to determine whether to apply the pro- est species are lichens (13 species) and fungi (11 posed tools and instruments. It is important to tar- species). Of the 26 mountain species, 16 are vas- get the action taken precisely so that species and cular plants, and they are primarily believed to be habitats are given adequate protection without under pressure because of climate change. There restricting other activities that are beneficial to are five marine species, the two fish species and society more than necessary. Tools and instru- three of the mammals. Since many of the 78 spe- ments to safeguard threatened species, habitats cies are mainly mountain species, many of them and ecosystems should promote coordination and are found in the counties that include a large pro- sound use of resources across sectors. portion of mountain areas: Oppland (23 species), Chapter 6.5 deals specifically with action to Sør-Trøndelag (23 species), Troms (18 species) safeguard genetic resources. and Finnmark (18 species). Of the critically endangered and endangered species in Svalbard, there are six vascular plants 6.2 Safeguarding threatened species and one lichen where 25 % or more of the Euro- pean population is believed to be found in Norway. To prevent the loss of species, the Government Seventeen of the species that are critically will continue to use both species-based measures endangered or endangered in Norway are in addi- such as regulating harvesting, protecting individ- tion threatened globally or at European level. ual species, designating priority species and estab- They include plants, insects, lichens, fish, birds lishing quality norms, and area-based measures and mammals. In six cases, 25 % or more of the that are intended to safeguard areas with specific European population is also believed to be in Nor- ecological functions for a species. The latter way. The six species are a bee, Osmia maritima, include protecting areas under the Nature Diver- wolverine, golden redfish, boreal felt lichen sity Act, identifying areas with specific ecological (Erioderma pedicellatum), hooded seal and spiny functions for priority species, designating selected dogfish. habitat types, and sectoral measures. The Govern- In the Government’s view, the most appropri- ment will also seek to prevent the loss of species ate approach for the majority of critically endan- by re-establishing populations and through gene gered and endangered species will be to use area- banks and breeding programmes. based measures that target habitats for a number The Government will seek to improve the con- of species simultaneously, for example protection servation status of threatened species. This is a under the Nature Diversity Act or designation of long-term effort. The Government’s first priority selected habitat types. Area-based measures will will be to improve the conservation status of spe- also be the most important approach for most cies that are critically endangered or endangered other threatened species. Species-based measures in Norway and that meet the additional criterion will be used where a species needs protection that either a substantial proportion of their Euro- against direct exploitation or strict protection is pean population is found in mainland Norway or needed. It is essential to assess what is the most in Svalbard, or they are threatened globally or in effective and appropriate approach before select- Europe as a whole. There are population targets ing the measures to implement. for the four large carnivores (wolf, bear, lynx and Certain habitats, often called hotspots for wolverine) and golden eagle, which are used in threatened species, support large numbers of the management of these species. threatened species. By protecting these habitats it In all, the Norwegian Red List of Species con- is possible to safeguard a number of threatened tains 1120 critically endangered and endangered 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 45 Nature for life

protection to some habitat patches, while others are safeguarded by designation as a selected habi- tat type. In other cases, it may be appropriate to use a combination of sectoral measures and the Planning and Building Act, perhaps combined with the designation of selected habitat types, if this gives adequate protection. The provisions of the Nature Diversity Act on marine protected areas and selected habitat types apply in Norway’s territorial waters, in other Figure 6.1 The lapwing is now red-listed as words out to 12 nautical miles beyond the base- endangered in Norway, after a substantial line. During work on the management plans for population decline in recent years. The main Norway’s sea areas, particularly valuable and vul- reason for the decline is changes in agricultural nerable areas have been identified, many of which practices. are at least partly outside Norway’s territorial waters. Some of these areas are important for Photo: Bård Bredesen/Naturarkivet threatened species. The need for measures to safeguard threatened species in these areas species simultaneously. Thus, area-based meas- (under the management plans or other legisla- ures targeting hotspot habitats are generally a tion) must be assessed in the light of the cumula- more appropriate way of safeguarding threatened tive environmental effects on threatened species species than measures targeting individual spe- and habitats and how these are changing, for cies, provided that the main threat to a species is example as a result of climate change, ocean acidi- not harvesting or other removal. The Government fication and new activities. will therefore consider establishing protected The Svalbard Environmental Protection Act areas under the Nature Diversity Act to cover applies to the entire land area of Svalbard and its areas that are hotspots for threatened species. waters out to the territorial limit, subject to the Habitat types for which this may be appropriate limitations imposed by international law, and are further discussed in Chapter 6.4 for each eco- includes provisions both on species-related meas- system. ures and measures relating to areas with specific When areas are protected under the Nature ecological functions for different species. Fishery Diversity Act, landowners and holders of rights policy instruments are also important for the are entitled to compensation from the state for marine ecosystem around Svalbard. financial losses incurred when protection makes In some cases, areas with specific ecological current use of the property more difficult. The functions for a species are threatened because exact restrictions on the use of an area must be they are no longer used, which may for example assessed on a case-by-case basis when specific result in open landscapes becoming overgrown. protection proposals are presented, as mentioned Here, the Government’s primary approach to con- in Chapter 6.1. There is already an established servation will be to use economic instruments system for voluntary protection of forest areas, such as grants towards grazing or active manage- and voluntary protection should also be tested in ment, if appropriate combined with designation of other ecosystems. Protection of areas under the selected habitat types. Private contracts may be an Nature Diversity Act is further discussed in Chap- important supplement in such cases, particularly ter 6.4 for each ecosystem. if few landowners are involved. Habitats that are important for threatened spe- If area-based measures are not sufficient to cies can also be designated as selected habitat ensure the survival of a species or are not the types under the Nature Diversity Act. The Gov- most appropriate or effective approach, the Gov- ernment will make use of this option if there are ernment will consider the designation of priority so many remaining patches of a particular habitat species under the Nature Diversity Act. This type that giving other public interests priority in makes it possible to prohibit all removal of, dam- some of these patches will not have a significant age to or destruction of the species in question. As bearing on the conservation status of the threat- mentioned above, the Government will first con- ened species associated with the habitat. One sider this option for endangered and critically solution that will be considered for such habitats endangered species that have a substantial pro- is to use the Nature Diversity Act to give statutory portion of their European population in Norway. 46 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

In doing this, the Government will also be meet- ple, no fishing is currently permitted for European ing the Act’s requirement for the authorities to eel, blue ling or golden redfish (see Chapter consider the designation of priority species in 6.4.1). In some cases, a longer stock rebuilding cases where there is evidence that the population period may be accepted after consideration of status or trends for a species are substantially con- other important public interests. trary to the management objective for species. The report on experience of the application of Designation of priority species is a suitable the Nature Diversity Act (see Chapter 5.2) shows approach if there are direct threats to populations that there is so far little information on what effect or stands of a species or to areas with specific eco- designation as a priority species has in practice. logical functions for the species. In particular, this Monitoring results are available for some species, approach will be considered for highly mobile spe- for example the Arctic fox. The Ministry of Cli- cies that range over considerable distances, mate and Environment will continue these moni- where protection of their entire range would be toring programmes. The Ministry will follow pop- too far-reaching, but certain areas with specific ulation trends for priority species generally, and ecological functions, for example breeding sites the effects of designating priority species will be for birds, can be protected. This may be an appro- assessed after the system has been operative for priate approach for both bird and spe- some years. As far as possible, this assessment cies. Designation of priority species will also be will be based on monitoring data. considered if statutory protection of the habitat Regardless of other action and policy instru- would be an unnecessarily strict approach to safe- ments, the presence of threatened species and guarding the species or if a species is found in their habitats will be an important consideration many small habitat patches and area-based meas- in decisions about matters that may have a nega- ures would not be effective. Area-based measures tive impact on these species, for example in plan- such as the establishment of protected areas will ning processes under the Planning and Building particularly be considered for species that are Act and decisions under sectoral legislation. Dur- found in more clearly delimited habitats, such as ing the decision-making process, the degree of plants, lichens and fungi, or if species-based threat to a species must be weighed against other approaches are not practical, for example for cer- public interests. The more seriously threatened a tain insect species. In some cases, designation of species is, the more weight must be given to the priority species will be the most appropriate meas- management objective for species set out in the ure for ensuring long-term survival. Nature Diversity Act. Each sector is responsible The group of threatened species that is the for incorporating this approach appropriately into Government’s first priority for improvements of sectoral legislation and guidance. conservation status is defined at the beginning of Transport projects can have serious negative Chapter 6.2. It is likely that after a further assess- impacts on threatened species in the area ment of these species, only a minority of them will affected, and the transport authorities will further be found to be best served by designation as prior- develop routines and guidance for the sector. For ity species. This is because many of them are example, guidance on the environmental impact plants, insects, lichens and fungi, and habitat con- assessment of road projects will be updated. servation will be more appropriate. Environmental crime also adds to pressures Protection by regulations under the Nature on a number of threatened species. The inspec- Diversity Act is a suitable way of safeguarding tion and enforcement work of the Norwegian species of plants, fungi and invertebrates that are Nature Inspectorate and targeted use of the envi- mainly threatened by harvesting or other ronmental coordinator system in the police ser- removal. However, most such species are already vice facilitates the exposure of such crime so that protected under the existing regulations. Terres- it can be prosecuted. Norway will continue its trial mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians efforts to combat fisheries crime at national and (collectively called wildlife species) are protected international level. unless designated as game species. Wildlife spe- Action on climate change, ocean acidification cies, salmonids and and marine and long-range transport of pollution does not species that are threatened by harvesting will be come within the scope of this white paper, but will safeguarded by means of stricter restrictions on in many cases also be very important for safe- harvesting and on the use of fishing gear and guarding threatened species and habitats. Other other equipment, or if necessary by prohibiting conservation measures may increase species’ harvesting, until their stocks recover. For exam- resilience to climate change. The Government will 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 47 Nature for life assess adaptation of the nature management one of the categories critically endangered, endan- regime to boost resilience. gered or vulnerable). Many of them are also important habitats for threatened species. The Government will use protection of areas To safeguard threatened species, the Government will: and designation of selected habitat types under • Make use of statutory protection and the designa- the Nature Diversity Act, combined with sectoral tion of selected habitat types and priority species legislation and grant schemes, to safeguard under the Nature Diversity Act to provide long- threatened habitat types. Statutory protection of term safeguards for threatened species and areas areas will be considered if there are very few with specific ecological functions for these spe- remaining patches of a habitat type and for habitat cies. In the first instance, these measures will be patches where ecological status is particularly used to improve the conservation status of species good. that are critically endangered or endangered in If the main threat to a habitat type is one par- Norway and that meet the additional criterion ticular activity that can be restricted tightly that either a substantial proportion of their Euro- enough and over the long term using the relevant pean population is found in Norway, or they are sectoral legislation, this approach will often pro- also threatened globally or in Europe as a whole. vide good enough safeguards. • Ensure that the situation of threatened species is The Nature Diversity Act provides the legal taken into account when central government authority for designating selected habitat types. authority is exercised, for example in decisions One of the important factors when deciding under sectoral legislation, when adopting central whether to designate a selected habitat type is government plans under the Planning and Buil- whether the status or trends for the type in ques- ding Act, and when allocating grant funding. tion are contrary to the Act’s management objec- • By providing guidance and in other ways, tives for habitat types. The Government will con- encourage the counties and municipalities to sider the possibility of designation of selected hab- take the situation of threatened species into acco- itat types for each of the threatened habitat types. unt when exercising their authority, for example Under the Nature Diversity Act, special account when adopting plans under the Planning and must be taken of selected habitat types when con- Building Act, making decisions under sectoral servation interests and other public interests are legislation and allocating grant funding. weighed against each other during decision-mak- • Consider the implications of climate change and ing processes. The different interests are consid- ocean acidification for the management of threa- ered within the framework of the relevant sectoral tened species, and adapt the management regime legislation. Designation of selected habitat types accordingly. is therefore generally a good cross-sectoral instru- • Take steps to improve cooperation between the ment. In addition, the Government considers it police and the inspection and enforcement autho- positive that this is an instrument that promotes rities. local autonomy and opportunities for municipali- ties to safeguard habitats through their land-use planning processes. The Government also empha- 6.3 Safeguarding threatened habitats sises the importance of assessing the suitability of selected habitat designation on a case-by-case As is the case for threatened species, the choice of basis. One element of this assessment should be measures to safeguard threatened habitats will to consider whether it is possible to integrate the depend on the range of pressures and impacts process of weighing up conservation interests affecting a particular habitat type. against other public interests for selected habitat Unlike populations of a species, which can types into sectoral instruments, either legal or often recover if the right types of measures are economic instruments or both, or sectoral plan- chosen, an area of threatened habitat that is ning tools. destroyed is often lost for ever. Re-establishing an Designation of selected habitat types can also area of habitat is much more costly than prevent- be useful in the case of habitat types that are ing its degradation, and designation of selected threatened because they are no longer being used habitat types is one approach that can be used to and actively managed. One proviso is that there avoid serious negative trends for habitats. Norway must be other measures that can be used to currently has a list of 40 habitat types that are con- encourage active management, for example grant sidered to be threatened (i.e. have been placed in schemes for maintaining cultural landscapes or 48 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life threatened habitat types. Funding is limited, but localities where habitat management is being car- within the framework of each grant scheme and ried out with funding through the grant scheme the other considerations to which it gives weight, for threatened habitats. For example, in 2015 it is possible to give higher priority to the most grants for habitat management were awarded for valuable areas of a habitat type and to areas where 560 (of 1275) of the traditional hay meadow locali- private stakeholders are interested in carrying out ties. Hay meadows have been designated as a habitat management with support from the public selected habitat type. In most cases, long-term sector. Designation of a selected habitat type does agreements have been concluded with the land- not oblige the authorities to provide funding, but owners. The Ministry of Climate and Environ- such habitats are likely to be given priority when ment will continue to monitor trends in selected funding is allocated. The presence of patches of habitat types, and the effects of designating selected habitat types will also be an important selected habitat types will be assessed after the consideration if there is a possibility of land-use system has been operative for some years. As far change at a later date. as possible, this assessment should be based on Another important consideration for the Gov- monitoring data. ernment is whether there are so many patches of Regardless of other action and policy instru- a habitat type that the loss of some of them is con- ments, the presence of threatened habitats will be sidered to be acceptable. The size of the habitat an important consideration in decisions about patches may be another element of the assess- matters that may have a negative impact on these ment. Designation as a selected habitat type may habitats, for example in planning processes under for example be useful if there are many small hab- the Planning and Building Act and decisions itat patches, and it would not be effective to carry under sectoral legislation. During the decision- out comprehensive protection procedures for all making process, the degree of threat to a habitat of these. It can also be a useful tool for larger must be weighed against other public interests. areas, especially since the requirement to take The more seriously threatened a habitat type is, special account of selected habitat types does not the more weight must be given to the manage- necessarily mean that the whole area must be pro- ment objectives for habitats in the Nature Diver- tected. The management regime for selected habi- sity Act when decisions are made under other leg- tat types does not prohibit a range of activities in islation. Each sector is responsible for incorporat- the same way as the rules for protected areas ing this approach appropriately into sectoral legis- established under the Nature Diversity Act. How a lation and guidance. selected habitat type should be safeguarded will Projects in the transport sector can have seri- depend on what kind of threat there is to the habi- ous negative impacts on patches of threatened tat type and whether activities carried out in habitat types, and the transport authorities will accordance with sectoral legislation can be further develop routines and guidance for the sec- adapted to take account of this. tor so that adverse impacts can be assessed and When designating selected habitat types, the avoided. Government will also consider whether all areas In some cases, the main threat to a habitat of a habitat type should be included, or only those type will be climate change, ocean acidification or of highest ecological status. Important considera- other types of large-scale environmental change. tions here will be whether there are so many This is particularly true of some polar and alpine patches of the habitat type that only the best of habitats, but climate change is expected to them need to be included, and whether it is realis- become a growing threat in other regions as well. tic for example to give priority to funding for habi- The Government will therefore assess adaptation tat management for all of them. If there are rela- of the nature management regime so that other tively few high-quality habitat patches, but there is measures can be used to boost the resilience of considerable potential for improving ecological threatened habitat types to such pressures. status at other sites by habitat management, this should also be taken into consideration. The report on experience of the application of To safeguard threatened habitats, the Government the Nature Diversity Act (see Chapter 5.2) shows will: that there is so far little information on what effect • Consider designating threatened habitats as sele- designation as a selected habitat type has in prac- cted habitat types where this is considered to be tice. Some information to supplement the report an appropriate approach. can be obtained from statistics on the number of 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 49 Nature for life

• Make use of statutory protection under the Norway has a knowledge-based fisheries man- Nature Diversity Act if there are very few patches agement regime, which is intended to ensure that of a threatened habitat or their ecological status the framework for commercial fisheries is as sus- is particularly good. tainable as possible. Directed fisheries for threat- • Use sectoral legislation where appropriate to take ened species including European eel, blue ling action, both of a long-term nature and as a rapid and golden redfish have been closed. Most of the response where necessary, to safeguard habitats other threatened fish species are sharks, skates that are mainly threatened by one particular and rays. Although no direct fishery is permitted activity. for these species, bycatches in other fisheries are • Ensure that the situation of threatened habitats a threat to several of them. The Ministry of Trade, is taken into account when central government Industry and Fisheries will continue efforts to sur- authority is exercised, for example in decisions vey the scale of bycatches and reduce bycatches under sectoral legislation, when adopting central of threatened species. Further knowledge will be government plans under the Planning and Buil- built up on stocks, fishing techniques and fishing ding Act, and when allocating grant funding. gear so that bycatches of threatened species and • By providing guidance and in other ways, damage to threatened habitat types can be encourage the counties and municipalities to reduced. Bilateral and international cooperation is take the situation of habitats into account when essential to ensure that shared stocks are fished exercising their authority, for example when sustainably, and Norway will continue to give high adopting plans under the Planning and Building priority to such cooperation. Cooperation with Act, making decisions under sectoral legislation Russia and the EU on the management of shared and allocating grant funding. stocks is particularly important. The Government • Consider the implications of climate change and will also consider whether further improvements ocean acidification for the management of threa- to the status of threatened fish species can be tened habitats, and adapt their management achieved through action on the basis of other sec- accordingly toral instruments. Monitoring and a ban on har- vesting will be continued for threatened whale species. 6.4 Safeguarding threatened species Norway’s seabird populations are changing; and habitats in each of Norway’s many are declining steeply, but not all of them. major ecosystems Norway has internationally important populations of a number of seabirds, and has a special respon- 6.4.1 Marine and coastal waters sibility for the populations of fulmar, cormorant Threatened species and habitats in marine and (subspecies Phalacrocorax carbo carbo), shag, coastal waters are safeguarded in various ways, king eider, common gull, lesser black-backed gull based on both sectoral instruments and environ- (subspecies Larus fuscus fuscus), glaucous gull, mental policy instruments. Threatened marine great black-backed gull, ivory gull, Brünnich’s species and habitats are an important element of guillemot, little auk, black guillemot and puffin. the work on the management plans for Norway’s More than 25 % of the European breeding popula- sea areas. Based on experience gained from the tion of all of these species is found in Norway. designation of dwarf eelgrass (Zostera noltei) as a A number of Norway’s seabird populations are priority species, the Government will assess threatened, and action needs to be taken to give which other threatened marine species should be them better protection. It has been pointed out safeguarded in the same way. A review is to be that management measures at two levels need to carried out to determine which threatened marine be considered – both measures that target threat- habitats should be designated as selected habitat ened seabird populations directly, and ecosystem- types. The establishment of marine protected based measures, where seabirds are considered areas under the Nature Diversity Act or sectoral as an integral part of the ecosystem. legislation for a representative selection of marine Measures that target threatened populations habitats (see Chapter 7.3.1) will be important in directly can include action to reduce pressures safeguarding marine habitats and species. Chap- such as predation (for example by mink), ter 5.2 discusses the geographical scope of the unwanted bycatches and disturbance. These must Nature Diversity Act, which delimits where these be adapted to different species and sites to make measures can be used. them as effective as possible. Action to reduce the mink population along the shoreline and on 50 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Humans

Seabirds Cod Whales Bluefin tuna

Small -feeding fish Herring and mackerel Jellyfish

Zooplankton

Phytoplankton

Figure 6.2 A marine food web Simplified illustration of a marine food web. Small plankton-feeding fish (fish larvae and small schooling fish species) and larger zooplankton species (krill and amphipods) play a key role in energy flow through the ecosystem to higher trophic levels – larger fish, seabirds, marine mammals and . Ecosystem-based management is vital for maintaining ecosystem integrity. coastal islands and skerries will be intensified. the results must be linked to knowledge devel- Surveys of bycatches and efforts to reduce the oped about the factors that affect seabird popula- scale of seabird bycatches in the fisheries will be tions and the effect of measures to safeguard continued. For example, the introduction of spe- them. Long time series of data are vital to this cific requirements relating to gear and catch work. Long-term mapping and monitoring of sea- methods will be considered in fisheries or areas birds is organised through the SEAPOP pro- where bycatches of seabirds are a problem. gramme, which also includes studies of the areas Apart from measures to safeguard threatened used by seabirds at different times of year. The populations, management measures for seabirds Government will continue and further develop should primarily form part of an ecosystem-based systematic mapping and monitoring of seabird management regime. It is essential to ensure that populations in all Norway’s sea areas through the seabirds, and many other predators in marine eco- SEAPOP programme. The development of knowl- systems, have adequate food supplies in the form edge about seabirds and their food supplies will of small plankton-feeding fish (fish larvae and continue, and measures that can improve food small schooling fish species) and larger zooplank- availability for seabirds will be assessed. This ton such as Arctic krill species. In coastal waters, work will involve cooperation between seabird healthy kelp forests are vital for seabirds and experts, marine scientists and the public adminis- other biodiversity and biological production. tration. As part of the follow-up to the white paper on The Pacific oyster is an alien species in Nor- the first update of the Barents Sea–Lofoten man- way, and is a new and growing threat to the Euro- agement plan (Meld. St. 10 (2010–2011)), unin- pean flat oyster in Norway. The Norwegian Biodi- tentional bycatches of seabirds during longlining versity Information Centre has assessed the for Greenland halibut and gill netting for lump- Pacific oyster and considers that there is a very sucker have been systematically registered. The high risk that it will displace native Norwegian aim is to quantify unintentional bycatches of sea- species. The Government will complete and birds and review possible preventive measures. implement an action plan for containing and con- Norway has an extensive monitoring system trolling the Pacific oyster. for marine ecosystems, and has also developed a The most seriously threatened of Norway’s good seabird monitoring programme. These must marine habitats at present is sugar kelp forest, be maintained to provide information on status and its ecological status is particularly poor along and trends for populations of marine species, and the Skagerrak coast. This is believed to be due to 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 51 Nature for life

Figure 6.3 A new reef complex was discovered off Sandnessjøen (Nordland) in autumn 2015. Two of the species that form the reef, the stony coral Lophelia pertusa (white) and the gorgonian Primnoa resedae- formis (orange) can be seen here. Banning bottom trawling is one important way of safeguarding coral reefs. Photo: MAREANO/Institute of Marine Research higher inputs of nutrients and more dep- against fishing using gear that is towed along the osition combined with climate change, which is seabed. Work is in progress to protect more coral resulting in higher runoff of nutrients and particu- reefs in this way, and a public consultation on pro- late matter from land. Action to improve the situa- posals to protect 10 more areas was held in 2015. tion will include measures that are part of the The aim is to establish new protected areas in river basin management plans and, where rele- 2016. vant, measures in municipal action plans for cli- The environmental and fisheries authorities mate change adaptation. The Government will will together evaluate how instruments and meas- also review other possible measures for reducing ures in the two sectors contribute to the conserva- inputs of nutrients and particulate matter to tion of marine habitat types and whether further important sugar kelp areas, including climate measures should be implemented. change adaptation measures for extreme precipi- The environmental and fisheries authorities tation events. A pilot project to re-establish sugar will also evaluate how information on threatened kelp forest will be initiated. International coopera- marine habitats should be made available to and tion is also of crucial importance. utilised by user groups. This can help to ensure There are substantial inputs of nutrients to the that adequate information is available during activ- Norwegian Skagerrak coast with ocean currents. ities such as commercial fisheries. The evaluation Norway will continue to give high priority to envi- will specifically include information about the dis- ronmental cooperation with the North Sea and tribution of coral habitats. Baltic Sea countries, including cooperation within In the petroleum sector, requirements to map OSPAR and the EEA Agreement. coral reefs and to take steps to prevent sediment The Government will also intensify efforts to and physical damage to coral reefs and protect threatened marine habitats including cold- other benthic communities help to prevent dam- water coral reefs, which are particularly vulnera- age to threatened marine habitats. ble to physical damage, sediment deposition, cli- It is important to continue mapping pro- mate change and ocean acidification. Nine coral grammes and build up knowledge about cumula- reefs have already received special protection tive environmental effects in order to address 52 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life pressures and impacts associated with the fisher- tected areas, as well as relevant sectoral legisla- ies, petroleum industry and other activities. Man- tion and the Planning and Building Act, to safe- agement of the marine environment will be based guard threatened habitats and habitats that are on the best available knowledge about cumulative important for threatened species in rivers and environmental effects in order to safeguard lakes. These include inland deltas, oxbow lakes threatened species and habitats as effectively as and other features of meandering rivers, large possible. sand and gravel banks, the spray zone near water- The marine management plans also focus on falls, calcareous lakes and lakes and that the conservation of threatened species and habi- are naturally free of fish. The Government will tats. In addition, relevant sectoral legislation con- give priority to areas that are already protected tains provisions that are important in protecting against hydropower developments or where it is threatened species and habitats against pressures not realistic for other to carry out hydro- and impacts associated with activities such as fish- power developments. Calcareous lakes have eries, the petroleum industry and maritime trans- already been designated as a selected habitat port. The Government will give weight to safe- type, and the Government will consider the estab- guarding threatened marine species and habitats lishment of protected areas as a supplement for in the further development of the management certain of these lakes. Oxbow lakes and other fea- plans for Norway’s sea areas. tures of meandering rivers are considered to be particularly poorly served by conservation meas- ures so far, given their significance for several 6.4.2 Rivers and lakes important species groups. The Government will The Water Resources Act and the therefore give priority to these habitats. The Regulation Act are important tools for safeguard- establishment of protected areas in freshwater ing threatened species and habitats in river sys- habitats is also discussed in Chapter 7.3.2. tems, both when new developments are planned The Government will continue measures that and when taking steps to improve ecological sta- have been initiated to deal with particularly inva- tus in rivers where there are already hydropower sive alien organisms in Norwegian rivers and developments. When hydropower licences are lakes. These include action to deal with signal revised in the years ahead, it will be important to crayfish, pike (outside its natural range) and look at possible ways of improving conditions for Canadian and Nuttall’s pondweeds. Information threatened species and habitats that are affected activities are also important for preventing the ille- by hydropower developments. The competent gal release of fish and avoiding the spread of inva- authorities will also make more active use of the sive organisms with boats and fishing gear. option of requiring licensing of older non-licensed In addition to land-use change, pollution puts hydropower developments to reduce damage to pressure on threatened species in rivers and threatened species and habitats. In addition, the lakes. Acidification, nutrient runoff from agricul- energy authorities and the environmental authori- tural areas and industrial releases can all have ties will make more active use of the standard negative impacts, either separately or in combina- nature management conditions in licences to tion. The Government will therefore continue its require action to reduce damage to threatened efforts to prevent pollution from harming threat- species and habitats. ened freshwater species. No fishing for eels is permitted in Norway because there is concern about the population sta- tus of the species in Europe as a whole. Other 6.4.3 Wetlands methods of reducing the negative impacts of Pressures on wetland species and habitats are human activity on eels have also been reviewed, largely associated with various forms of land con- including steps to reduce barriers to migration in version and land-use change or with pollution. In rivers. The environmental authorities, in coopera- line with the general principles for selecting tools tion with other relevant authorities, will consider and instruments to safeguard threatened species how to respond to the proposals in the review. and habitats set out in Chapters 6.2 and 6.3, the In line with the general principles for selecting Government therefore considers that area-based tools and instruments to safeguard threatened measures will be the most important approach to species and habitats set out in Chapters 6.2 and safeguarding threatened wetland species and hab- 6.3, the Government will use a combination of itats. They will also make a contribution to climate designation of selected habitat types and pro- change adaptation. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 53 Nature for life

In accordance with its general policy for tats discussed earlier, suitable approaches for threatened species and habitats, see Chapters 6.1 safeguarding threatened forest species are area- and 6.3, the Government will in the case of wet- based measures such as establishing protected land ecosystems particularly consider the protec- areas, setting aside key biotopes that are not to be tion of selected breeding, staging and moulting felled, and designating selected habitat types and areas for critically endangered and endangered priority species (together with areas with specific bird species. In some cases, it may be appropriate ecological functions for these species). to designate priority wetland species, see the cri- Key biotopes that are set aside and not felled teria for this in Chapter 6.2. The Government will safeguard habitats for threatened and near-threat- also consider protection under the Nature Diver- ened species, and this has positive effects on sity Act for selected lime-rich lowland mires, many species. By 2015, about 70 000 areas cover- which are particularly important for threatened ing a total area of about 750 square kilometres had species. To safeguard patches of threatened wet- been identified as key biotopes through environ- land habitats that are not given statutory protec- mental inventories. This corresponds to almost tion under the Nature Diversity Act, the Govern- 1 % of the total area of productive forest. Since ment will consider the designation of selected environmental inventories have not yet been car- habitat types. Further, the Government will give ried out for all forest properties, the proportion of priority to habitat management in protected wet- productive forest set aside as key biotopes is land areas in order to improve the conservation expected to increase. status of threatened species, and will continue and The Government’s position is that protecting step up peatland restoration as a climate policy more forest will have substantial positive effects and biodiversity measure, both within and outside on a large proportion of the threatened forest spe- protected areas. Peatland restoration can also cies in the areas concerned. Forest protection is help to improve the conservation status of threat- intended to safeguard areas that are important for ened species. threatened species and to build up networks of Hay fens are a threatened habitat and already protected areas including a representative selec- designated as a selected habitat type. The Govern- tion of different forest types, geographical areas ment will continue existing grant schemes so that and climatic conditions. Thus, establishing nature more sites can be safeguarded, and will monitor reserves in forest areas is an effective way of safe- trends in land use for this habitat type and assess guarding a large number of threatened species whether stricter protection of a large number of that require a wide range of different ecological sites is necessary. niches and are found in many different geographi- The Government will consider the designation cal areas. There is a need to expand protection of of more threatened wetland habitats as selected forest areas, see Chapter 7. habitat types, particularly raised bogs, ombro- Forest habitats that are important for threat- trophic mires near the coast, lowland spring fens ened species and should be safeguarded by pro- and active marine deltas. Conservation measures tection under the Nature Diversity Act include for palsa mires are considered to be adequate pro- lime-rich broad-leaved forest (oak, beech and vided that the county conservation plan for wet- lime) and several types of old-growth forest. lands for Finnmark is implemented, see Chapter The area-based measures discussed above will 7.3.3. Further protection measures would proba- not adequately safeguard all threatened forest spe- bly not safeguard the palsa mires any more satis- cies. Certain species have such small populations factorily, since they are threatened mainly by cli- that chance events could cause their extinction in mate change. Norway. For these, the Government will consider designation as priority species. This is dependent on adequate information about the species in ques- 6.4.4 Forest tion. Designation as priority species or species pro- Many of the critically endangered and endan- tection will also be considered for species that are gered species associated with forests belong to mainly threatened by direct exploitation (for exam- species groups that are found in fairly clearly ple that are collected or harvested for sale). Finally, delimited habitats. The main threats are related to designation as priority species will be considered land use (forestry) and land conversion, not to for some wildlife species that are not particularly harvesting and other removal. In line with the closely associated with one specific habitat. general principles for selecting tools and instru- The problems that can arise when cervid pop- ments to safeguard threatened species and habi- ulations become too large are mentioned in Chap- 54 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life ter 5. There is little to suggest that large cervid The Government will consider whether to des- populations alone are the reason why any species ignate more selected habitat types in forest. Since are threatened. However, the general elements of there are a number of pressures on such habitats, cervid management described in Chapter 5.5 will and they are regulated under different legislation reduce any negative impacts of cervids, which (including the Forestry Act, the Water Resources may also benefit threatened species. Act, the Watercourse Regulation Act, the Energy Management of the threatened forest-dwelling Act, the Mineral Resources Act and the Planning large carnivores (wolf, brown bear and lynx) and and Building Act), the Government’s view is that the golden eagle is based on the Bern Convention, the cross-sectoral approach required for selected the Nature Diversity Act and the 2004 and 2011 habitat types will have a positive effect on these national cross-party agreements on carnivore forest habitats. However, designation of selected management. The 2011 agreement specifies that habitat types does not afford strict protection. For there must be a clear division into zones where threatened habitats that are only found at a few the carnivores are given priority and others where localities in Norway, such as forest on ultramafic livestock have priority. and beech and lime forest on lime-rich soils, The regional carnivore management boards and for particularly valuable areas of all threat- are responsible for drawing up carnivore manage- ened forest habitat types, the Government will ment plans and updating them regularly. The therefore consider protection of areas under the plans must clearly identify the zones where carni- Nature Diversity Act as well as or instead of desig- vores have priority and those where livestock nation of selected habitat types. have priority. They must also set out proposals for the use of funding on measures to prevent and reduce carnivore-human conflicts in accordance 6.4.5 Cultural landscapes with the dual goals of the management regime. The main threat to most species and habitats in The management plan areas are not based on the cultural landscape is the discontinuation of municipal or county boundaries. active use (grazing and haymaking), followed by The carnivore and livestock zones in the man- overgrowing of the open landscape. The Govern- agement plans can be adjusted to separate carni- ment’s main approach to safeguarding threatened vores and livestock even more clearly, both spa- species and habitats in the cultural landscape is tially and temporally. This will create a more pre- therefore to provide a framework that encourages dictable situation for livestock farmers and help in grazing on a commercial basis (using schemes achieving the population targets for the large car- that are part of the Agricultural Agreement), in nivores. With this in , the management plans combination with grant schemes to promote habi- must 1) seek the optimal spatial coordination of tat management and grazing where there are carnivore and livestock zones between regions threatened habitats. and in cross-border areas, 2) ensure that carni- Intensification of agriculture and land-use vore breeding zones overlap as far as possible, changes can also have negative impacts on cul- and 3) take into account carnivore biology, distri- tural landscapes. bution and population connectivity and the availa- The conversion of agricultural areas for other bility of suitable habitat. Livestock zones should purposes can result in and be delimited so that they are continuous, provide reduce the connectivity of ecological networks for predictability in carnivore management and and natural corridors in cultural landscapes. To make livestock farming viable in practice. reduce the negative impacts on threatened spe- Several habitat types in Norwegian forests are cies, the Government will promote the use of threatened. One of them, calcareous lime forest, is coordinated regional land-use and transport plans. considered to be vulnerable and is already a This will also reduce the pressure for new cultiva- selected habitat type. Other threatened habitat tion of other areas, which may include important types include coastal spruce and pine forest (a habitats. In a few cases, designation of priority large proportion of their range is in Norway) and species associated with the cultural landscape forest types that are spring-fed or on calcareous may also be appropriate, in accordance with the soils. A number of these habitats are also impor- criteria set out in Chapter 6.2. tant for threatened species. The most important Three semi-natural habitats – hay meadows, pressures vary from one habitat to another, but hay fens and coastal heathland – have already include forestry, land conversion and mining. been designated as selected habitat types. Hay meadows have been a selected habitat type since 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 55 Nature for life

2011, and have shown a positive trend, with an increase in the number of sites that are being 6.4.6 Mountains actively managed. This is partly because it is pos- Considerable areas of the Norwegian mountains sible to apply for grants for habitat management of are already protected as national or other selected habitat types. The Government will use types of protected areas. Many of the threatened the experience that has been gained as part of the mountain species are found in these areas. Only a basis for assessing whether designation of small number of developments might be enough selected habitat types is a suitable measure for to cause the regional extinction of or a serious other threatened habitats associated with cultural population decline in these species. More than landscapes. half of the threatened mountain species (34 of 64 One problem for many of the species associ- species), and most of the threatened mosses and ated with hay meadows is that these are isolated vascular plants, are found in lime-rich areas. The habitat islands, often at considerable distances Government therefore considers it important to from each other. The Ministry of Climate and map lime-rich areas in the mountains in more Environment will in consultation with other rele- detail to develop an overview of any such areas vant ministries consider which other types of outside the existing protected areas. If there are areas, for example species-rich road verges, can many lime-rich areas and threatened species that function as part of ecological networks. are not adequately safeguarded by the existing Invasive alien species are already having a protected areas, the Government will consider negative impact on several habitats in cultural protection under the Nature Diversity Act for the landscapes, such as sand dunes, open areas on most important localities and designation as shallow lime-rich soils and semi-natural meadows. selected habitat types for the rest. Moreover, the The Ministry of Climate and Environment will Ministry of Climate and Environment and other therefore in consultation with other relevant min- relevant ministries will provide clear guidance on istries identify pathways of introduction and par- how to safeguard valuable and threatened moun- ticularly vulnerable areas and habitats in cultural tain species and habitats, and species that need landscapes, so that action can be taken specifically large, continuous areas of habitat, with reference to prevent the spread of invasive alien species. to sectoral legislation and the Planning and Build- A combination of general measures to pro- ing Act. mote the maintenance of farming activities and Caves have been identified as a threatened measures specifically to safeguard particularly habitat type in Norway. The Government pro- valuable areas, together with information activi- poses designation as a selected habitat type as a ties, will have the greatest positive effect on way of safeguarding caves that are affected by threatened species and habitats in cultural land- quarrying, land-use changes, hydropower devel- scapes. The scheme for selected agricultural land- opments and pollution. However, designation as a scapes is a good example of the second category, selected habitat type does not make it possible to and is designed to safeguard a representative regulate access, tourism and other recreational selection of valuable Norwegian agricultural land- uses. The Government will therefore consider scapes. Under the scheme, multi-year agreements protection under the Nature Diversity Act and are concluded with landowners, who undertake to restrictions on access for localities where this is manage the land in a way that safeguards both the the main pressure. Restrictions on access should overall cultural landscape and the threatened spe- be accompanied by a strategy for visitor access to cies and habitats in the areas. The Government each cave to ensure a good balance between con- therefore intends to continue the scheme. servation and use. There are also some naturally open lowland Management of the threatened large carni- habitats, and the main threats to these are often vores and golden eagle in the mountains is based physical disturbance and pollution. Open lowland on the Bern Convention, the Nature Diversity Act areas are often important elements of the land- and the 2004 and 2011 national cross-party agree- scape in addition to supporting threatened spe- ments on carnivore management. Culling of wol- cies, so that establishing protected areas under verine by licensed hunters is not effective enough the Nature Diversity Act can be an important at present, and the Government therefore wishes measure. The Government will therefore review to test some new measures to improve the effi- open lowland areas where there are threatened ciency of the cull. The Government’s policy for habitat types, and consider whether the protection management of large forest carnivores is of areas is an appropriate step. described in Chapter 6.4.4. 56 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Norway has drawn up a national polar bear 6.4.7 Polar ecosystems action plan which focuses on closer monitoring of General efforts to maintain good ecological status the population. The polar bear monitoring pro- in polar ecosystems are described in Chapter 5, gramme will be further developed on the basis of and will also be the most important way of safe- the plan. Cooperation between the five polar bear guarding threatened species and habitats in the range states – Canada, Greenland/Denmark, the polar regions. Many of the instruments described US, Russia and Norway – was strengthened with in Chapter 5 will also be appropriate for targeted the adoption of a circumpolar action plan at the measures to safeguard threatened species and meeting of the parties to the Agreement on the habitats. Climate change is a rapidly growing Conservation of Polar Bears in September 2015. threat to species and habitats in Svalbard, and in More knowledge needs to be built up about addition there has been an expansion of many threatened species and habitats in the Norwegian types of activities both in and around the archipel- part of the Arctic, and more systematic evalua- ago. The Government will adapt the management tions need to be carried out. It is particularly of Svalbard to these changes. important to learn more about the implications of In Svalbard, the strict regime under the Sval- climate change for threatened species and habi- bard Environmental Protection Act and associated tats in the Arctic. The Government will further regulations, and the extensive protected areas, develop the knowledge base for the red lists of provide a high level of protection against environ- threatened species and habitat types in Svalbard, mental pressures from local activity. The land focusing on marine habitats and habitats associ- areas and territorial waters of Jan Mayen (except ated with sea ice. for two areas where human activity is permitted) Since climate change is a significant and grow- have been designated as a . This ing pressure on species and habitats in the polar also helps to protect threatened species and habi- regions, the Government’s efforts to combat cli- tats in Svalbard and on Jan Mayen. Measures to mate change will be especially important for safeguard threatened species and habitats will be threatened species and habitats in the Arctic. incorporated into the management plans for the large protected areas in Svalbard in the light of cli- mate and environmental change and changes in 6.5 Genetic resources human activity. Outside the protected areas, threatened species and habitats will be further Biodiversity exists at different levels. Genetic safeguarded through targeted application of the diversity means variety at the level of genes and Svalbard Environmental Protection Act where genetic material, and in genetic make-up between necessary to counteract environmental pressures. individuals of the same species. This diversity pro- The Barents Sea–Lofoten and Norwegian Sea vides the basis for evolutionary adaptation of spe- management plans focus on the conservation of cies to different physical surroundings and cli- threatened species and habitats, including Arctic matic conditions. In-situ conservation of genetic species and habitats. Both the management plans diversity is part of the overall effort to safeguard and sectoral legislation that is important for the biodiversity. The international framework for this protection of threatened marine species and habi- work is set by the Convention on Biological Diver- tats are discussed further in Chapter 6.4.1. sity and the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Bene- A number of the threatened species in the Arc- fit-sharing under the Convention, and the Interna- tic are migratory species or have populations that tional Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food are shared by more than one country. Interna- and Agriculture. In Norway, the Norwegian Envi- tional cooperation is essential for effective conser- ronment Agency is responsible for coordinating vation of these species and their habitats. The initiatives for in-situ conservation of genetic diver- Government will strengthen cooperation under sity. the Bonn Convention and within the framework of Aichi target 13 under the Convention on Bio- the Arctic Council on the management of migra- logical Diversity is about maintaining the genetic tory species and populations that are shared diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and between several countries, focusing particularly domesticated animals and their wild relatives. on threatened species. Special weight will be This genetic diversity includes valuable traits that given to cooperation on species that are depend- can improve the adaptive capacity of agriculture to ent on the Arctic sea ice. climate change and give greater resistance to dis- eases. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 57 Nature for life

The agricultural sector has a special responsi- guarding specific habitats and areas where they bility for monitoring, conservation and sustainable grow, for example by sustainable use and habitat use of national genetic resources for food and management. One advantage of in-situ conserva- agriculture. Norway is involved in international tion is that plants can adapt to a changing climate cooperation under FAO to achieve Aichi target 13, and other changes in environmental conditions. among other things through the adoption of Establishing protected areas and other measures global plans of action for genetic resources for under the Nature Diversity Act can make an food and agriculture. The Norwegian Genetic important contribution to this work. Other meas- Resource Centre, which is part of the Norwegian ures may include habitat management for hay Institute of Bioeconomy Research, is responsible meadows and ensuring that the conservation of for implementing and updating Norway’s national genetic resources is included in operational man- action plans for the conservation and sustainable agement plans drawn up in accordance with sec- use of genetic resources in farm animals, forest tion 47 of the Nature Diversity Act. It is important trees and , including the wild relatives of that both environmental and agricultural grant food plants. schemes are maintained, among other things to Ex-situ conservation of genetic resources for safeguard threatened species and habitats. food and agriculture takes place primarily in The Norwegian Genetic Resource Centre is sperm banks, seed banks, clone collections, muse- currently running a project on in-situ conserva- ums, arboreta and botanical gardens, while in-situ tion of wild relatives in protected areas in conservation involves the active use of popula- Norway. The project has identified more than 200 tions of farm animals and crop plants, and the con- species in the Norwegian flora that are either util- servation of genetic diversity in natural popula- ity plants themselves or related to important food tions of forest trees. The Government will con- or feed plants, and that should be maintained in tinue Norwegian participation in Nordic gene their natural habitats. In this way, their natural bank cooperation through NordGen (the Nordic genetic diversity and traits that are specially Genetic Resource Center) under the Nordic adapted to the climate and growing conditions in Council of Ministers and operation of the Svalbard Norway can be safeguarded and continue to Global Seed Vault as a repository for duplicates of develop. In-situ conservation is also being used seed collections from the world’s gene banks. In for forest genetic resources, and gene conserva- addition, active cooperation with private- and pub- tion units for forest trees have been established in lic-sector actors will be used to maintain stands of 23 protected areas (nature reserves). Genetic forest trees, clone collections, sperm banks and resources that are important for commercial for- seed banks of genetic resources for food and agri- estry are maintained both in selected forest culture. stands and in seed orchards. Seeds from impor- Conservation strategies for traditional breeds tant stands of forest trees are kept in NordGen’s of farm animals, crop varieties and forest trees are seed collection and in the Svalbard Global Seed based on the principle that genetic resources for Vault to provide information on changes in genetic food and agriculture are best safeguarded by composition over time. Chapters V and VII of the using them in farming and forestry. Conservation Nature Diversity Act provide the legal framework efforts can make it possible to produce special- for this work. The environmental authorities are ised products and products with attractive quali- responsible for following up the Act by developing ties that can provide income for farms and local further legislation and agreements on the collec- communities and thus ensure sustainable tion and use of genetic material obtained from the resource use. Grant schemes for environmental natural environment. measures in agriculture and forestry provide We currently know too little about how genetic important support for these efforts. The Agricul- diversity is being affected by factors such as habi- tural Agreement also includes grant schemes for tat fragmentation and degradation or climate farm animal breeds of conservation value, and the change. The Government therefore considers it scheme for native endangered cattle breeds will important to continue knowledge development, be expanded to include endangered breeds of including through national mapping and monitor- sheep, goats and horses that are native to Norway. ing programmes, and to develop good conserva- In-situ conservation of forest trees and of wild tion strategies, for example using action plans and relatives of crop plants can be achieved by safe- management plans. 58 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

7 Conservation of a representative selection of Norwegian nature

7.1 Introduction tors will ensure that the knowledge base is as good as possible and that biodiversity considera- Aichi target 11 is specifically about using area- tions and other public interests are weighed based conservation measures for long-term con- against each other before decisions are made. servation. Norway’s corresponding national tar- According to section 8 of the Nature Diversity Act: get is that ‘a representative selection of Norwe- ‘Official decisions that affect biological, geological gian nature will be maintained for future genera- and landscape diversity shall, as far as is reasona- tions’. Promoting the conservation of ‘the full ble, be based on scientific knowledge of the popu- range of variation of habitats and landscape types’ lation status of species, the range and ecological is specifically mentioned in section 33 of the status of habitat types, and the impacts of environ- Nature Diversity Act in a list of the objectives of mental pressures. The knowledge required shall establishing protected areas. Others include the be in reasonable proportion to the nature of the conservation of endangered natural environments case and the risk of damage to biological, geologi- and major intact ecosystems. Long-term conserva- cal and landscape diversity.’ tion measures can play a part in achieving several of the Aichi targets at the same time. This is also discussed in Chapter 6, where the protection of 7.2 Choice of long-term conservation areas under the Nature Diversity Act is mentioned measures as an appropriate way of safeguarding threatened species and habitats. The Government will seek to In Norway, the only long-term conservation meas- achieve both national and international targets for ure, apart from the designation of priority species, long-term conservation through a combination of that gives protection against environmental pres- protection of areas under the Nature Diversity Act sures across sectors is statutory protection of and relevant sectoral measures. In this context, areas under the Nature Diversity Act (and previ- relevant measures are long-term in nature and ously the Nature Conservation Act) or the Sval- give effective protection against relevant pres- bard Environmental Protection Act. Protected sures on geographically defined areas of biodiver- areas are established by the King in Council. The sity importance. Examples of sectoral measures Storting (Norwegian parliament) has issued are the scheme for setting aside key biotopes in guidelines for the implementation of protection forest that are not to be felled, prohibiting the use plans, for example in a 1992 white paper on the of certain types of fishing gear under the Marine plan and through the annual budget Resources Act, and protecting river systems or proposals. parts of them against hydropower developments. Sectoral measures include rules and schemes If such measures are to fulfil their purpose, the that give areas some form of protection against areas involved must be managed in a way that relevant environmental pressures, usually protec- maintains their conservation value in practice. tion against a specific type of development or As is the case for measures to safeguard activity. In the Government’s view, such measures threatened species and habitats, it is important to will often be sufficient if the development or activ- target area-based conservation action so that spe- ity in question constitutes the main threat to the cies and habitats are given adequate protection area. However, they must provide effective, long- without restricting other activities that are benefi- term protection against the development or activ- cial to society more than necessary. The proce- ity in delimited areas of particular conservation dural rules and requirements for environmental value. Some sectoral types of protection apply to impact assessment in legislation for various sec- more than one type of development or activity. For 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 59 Nature for life

Figure 7.1 Bog asphodel in flower in Rago national park in Nordland. Norway has safeguarded a repre- sentative selection of its dramatic mountain scenery by implementing the national park plan. Photo: Kjersti Gram Andersen example, the Protection Plan for Watercourses that the current protected areas need to be sup- (see Chapter 7.3.2 on rivers and lakes) gives pro- plemented, but only to a limited extent, to correct tection against both hydropower developments weaknesses in the system, and it will be resource- and other types of development. The Govern- and cost-effective to organise this at county level. ment’s proposals for the use of sector-specific As a general rule, the Government will make measures are discussed below in the sections on use of protection on a voluntary basis when estab- each major ecosystem. lishing protected areas on privately owned land. Considerable areas of Norway already have So far, this form of protection has only been used statutory protection. The Government therefore for forest. considers that no large-scale expansion of this Where appropriate, protection on a voluntary form of conservation is needed. However, protec- basis should also be tried out in other ecosystems tion of forest on a voluntary basis will be than forest. The Government also considers it expanded, and work on marine protected areas important to seek political agreement at local level will continue. In the other major ecosystems, on the implementation of protection processes. there is a limited need to supplement protected Important areas that are publicly owned areas to include habitat types that are currently should be safeguarded by statutory protection, poorly represented (see more details in Chapter and steps will be taken to ensure that relevant 7.3). The Government will consider whether the stakeholders have satisfactory opportunities for protected areas are likely to be resilient to future participation in the protection processes. climate change. The Government will also evalu- The national park plan proposed the establish- ate whether the ecological network approach, as ment of 40 new protected areas and the expansion used for example in work under the Bern and of 14 existing areas. All but four of the proposals Ramsar Conventions, is clearly enough reflected have been implemented. Two of the proposals in Norway’s selection of protected areas and their that have not been implemented are in Finnmark ecological coherence. The Government concludes county (to establish Muvrrešáhpi national park 60 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life and Goahteluoppal protected landscape, and sentatives appointed by the Sámediggi (Sami par- expand Øvre Anarjohka national park), one is in liament) in areas where there are Sami interests. Nordland (Tysfjord/Hellemobotn national park) Landowners and other stakeholders can take part and the fourth is in Troms (Treriksrøysa national in the management of these areas through mem- park). There has been a great deal of local opposi- bership in advisory committees appointed by the tion to these proposals, especially in Finnmark management bodies. Administrative authority for and Nordland. The Government does not wish to the smaller protected areas, mainly nature proceed with these proposals unless political reserves, smaller protected landscapes and habi- agreement on the establishment of the protected tat management areas, is delegated to the relevant areas can be achieved locally, in the municipalities municipalities if they wish to assume this respon- that would be affected. The proposed Treriks- sibility. In Svalbard, the Governor is responsible røysa national park was intended to form part of a for inspection and enforcement in the protected continuous protected area in Norway, Sweden and areas and for taking any steps considered neces- , but this has not so far been a priority for sary to achieve the purpose of the protection. The Sweden or Finland. In the Government’s view, it is Governor is also responsible for drawing up man- not appropriate to proceed with this proposal agement plans through processes involving the either, unless the municipality itself wishes to do participation of local stakeholders and the Long- so and trilateral cooperation on the process can be yearbyen Local Administration. Management organised. plans are approved by the Norwegian Environ- In some cases, individuals, organisations or ment Agency in consultation with the Directorate municipalities propose the establishment of for Cultural Heritage. national parks under the Nature Diversity Act. Norway’s protected areas support valuable The Government considers such initiatives to be biodiversity, and with a long-term management very constructive. However, if the Government is approach that is line with the purpose of protec- to proceed with such proposals, there must be tion, they can provide an important basis for local, political consensus on this in the municipalities nature-based value creation. The national parks involved, they must meet the scientific criteria for and large protected landscapes in particular pro- establishing protected areas, and protecting any vide a basis for the development of nature-based such area must be consistent with the budgetary tourism. Local management of these areas makes priorities for protection of areas. it possible for a municipality to coordinate the Both individuals and a range of public inter- management of protected areas with land-use ests are affected by the establishment of protected management in the rest of the municipality, and to areas. Good, inclusive administrative procedures facilitate nature-based tourism in and around the are of crucial importance in ensuring that stake- protected areas. holders, including landowners, municipalities, The ecological status of protected areas must interest groups and sectoral authorities, feel that be maintained or improved to comply with the protection decisions are legitimate. Sections 41 to purpose of the protection decisions. Until now, 43 of the Nature Diversity Act describe the proce- routines for monitoring whether the ecological dures to be followed, and these were further elab- status of protected areas is being maintained (or orated in 2015 in a circular from the Ministry of improved in line with the purpose of protection) Climate and Environment. During the administra- have not always been adequate. A system is there- tive process, the conservation value of the area fore being developed for monitoring and report- that is to be protected must be clearly identified, ing on specified ecological or landscape qualities together with the other interests that must be of protected areas and trends in these qualities. taken into consideration. This system will be a sound basis for effective and A sense of local ownership and identity, the appropriate management of protected areas. principle that decisions should be taken at the The Government will give priority to sound lowest possible administrative level, and a combi- management of the existing protected areas. nation of local knowledge and scientific knowl- There are requirements to draw up operational edge are a good basis for sound management of and in some cases strategic management plans for protected areas. Administrative authority for the many of the protected areas. These will specify national parks and other large protected areas in what needs to be done to maintain conservation mainland Norway has been delegated to manage- value, make arrangements for access and use, etc. ment bodies consisting of politicians from the This will provide predictability for all stakehold- municipalities and counties involved, and repre- ers. The Government would like to emphasise 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 61 Nature for life that all management plans must comply with the ment’s policy is to continue cross-sectoral marine framework set by the regulations establishing the protection under section 39 of the Nature Diver- protected area in question and the provisions of sity Act to ensure that a selection of representa- the Nature Diversity Act. The Government con- tive, distinctive and threatened underwater habi- siders it important that management plans take tats along the coast and in territorial waters is the implications of climate change for efforts to safeguarded for future generations. The objective maintain the conservation value of protected is for these areas, together with areas that are areas properly into account. This is particularly safeguarded under other legislation, to form a net- important in Svalbard, where the climate is chang- work of marine protected areas that will safeguard ing very rapidly. In mainland Norway, the Norwe- ecosystems, habitats and species. gian Nature Inspectorate plays an important role Marine areas may also be included when pro- in maintaining the conservation value of protected tected areas on land, such as national parks and areas, both through its inspection and enforce- nature reserves, are established. Within such ment activities and through its other functions – areas, all activity that may reduce conservation habitat management, providing advice and infor- value is regulated in accordance with the purpose mation, facilitating public access and monitoring of the protection. Activities that are not contrary ecological status. to the purpose of protection will still be permitted. Private conservation agreements can also play Marine protected areas can serve several pur- an important part in safeguarding Norwegian poses at once. In addition to protecting areas that nature. However, they may not provide long-term are of importance for biodiversity against environ- protection, and can only give protection against mental pressures, they can be important refer- pressures and impacts that the private landowner ence areas for research and monitoring. can influence. In addition to the areas that have been given cross-sectoral protection, there are many areas that are protected against various types of fishing To safeguard a representative selection of Norwegian activities under the fisheries legislation. For nature for future generations, the Government will: example, a number of areas are protected against • Improve the management regime for existing the use of fishing gear and techniques that can protected areas, among other things by making it damage coral reefs, see Chapter 6.5. The Ministry more efficient and more clearly targeted, in order of Trade, Industry and Fisheries will in consulta- to maintain the conservation value of protected tion with the Ministry of Climate and Environ- areas and ensure that they become more resilient ment review whether these measures are suffi- to climate change and more intensive use. cient to protect a representative selection of habi- • Protect habitats and ecosystems that are cur- tats against relevant fisheries activities. The two rently underrepresented under the Nature Diver- ministries will among other things consider safe- sity Act. guarding a more representative selection of coral • Consider adjustments to the boundaries of prote- habitats either under section 66 of the Regulations cted areas and if appropriate the expansion of relating to sea-water fisheries or under section 19 protected areas to improve ecological networks of the Marine Resources Act. The ministries will and resilience to climate change. also assess the ecological coherence of marine • Test protection on a voluntary basis in ecosys- protected areas. tems other than forest. • Make use of and if necessary further develop other area-based conservation measures so that 7.3.2 Rivers and lakes they provide effective, long-term protection About 15 % of Norway’s total area of freshwater is against relevant environmental pressures. now protected or proposed for protection under the Nature Diversity Act. Nevertheless, a number of habitats are poorly represented in protected 7.3 Protection of areas in each of areas. These include oxbow lakes and other fea- Norway’s major ecosystems tures of meandering rivers, large sand and gravel banks, the spray zone near waterfalls (especially 7.3.1 Marine and coastal waters outside Eastern Norway) and lakes and ponds Marine protected areas may be established in that are naturally free of fish. Most of these are Norway’s territorial waters, extending up to 12 habitats for a range of threatened species. The nautical miles beyond the baseline. The Govern- Government will therefore consider some supple- 62 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life mentary protection of areas in rivers and lakes. level supplementary protection of areas. The Gov- Protection processes that make the selection of ernment notes that wetlands have particularly protected areas more representative and that at important climate-related functions. Peatlands are the same time safeguard threatened species will a major carbon sink. Open alluvial systems, inland be given priority. The Government will also give deltas and peatlands regulate water flow and pro- priority to statutory protection of valuable areas vide protection against and natural haz- that are already protected against hydropower ards. They can therefore play a part in climate developments through the Protection Plan for change adaptation and help to reduce damage to Watercourses. The Government will consider vital infrastructure. The Government will attach options for protection of lakes and rivers on a vol- importance to this when considering supplemen- untary basis. tary protection of areas under the Nature Diver- Through the Protection Plan for Water- sity Act. courses, 389 river systems or parts of river sys- tems are protected against hydropower develop- ments. They include a wide variety of river sys- 7.3.4 Forest tems and types of rivers, and the plan plays an The Government will continue its long-term forest important part in the conservation of a represent- conservation work, mainly in the form of protec- ative selection of Norway’s rivers and lakes. The tion under the Nature Diversity Act for publicly conservation value of these rivers must also be owned forest and protection on a voluntary basis taken into account in development projects in for privately owned areas, in both cases following other sectors. This is required by the Water the provisions of the Nature Diversity Act con- Resources Act and Norway’s national policy cerning compensation. Through cooperation guidelines for protected river systems. Neverthe- between the environmental authorities and the less, some developments do take place in pro- forest owners’ organisations, the Government will tected river systems that reduce their conserva- establish good procedures for rapid evaluation of tion value. The Government will seek to ensure forest areas of high conservation value for protec- that the conservation value of protected river sys- tion on a voluntary basis if their value is threat- tems is maintained, or restored if developments ened by the construction of forest roads, logging have had negative impacts that prove to have or other forestry activities. Examples of such reduced their conservation value. The conserva- areas are forest where a high proportion of the tion value of protected river systems is to be safe- area is set aside as key biotopes that are not to be guarded through application of existing legisla- felled, and large continuous forest areas contain- tion, especially the Planning and Building Act and ing species and habitats found in areas with little the Water Resources Act. The Government will infrastructure development. also assess whether parts of the protected river Relatively little of the large forest areas in low- systems need to be further safeguarded by pro- lying parts of Eastern Norway has been pro- tecting areas under the Nature Diversity Act. tected. It will be important to establish new nature reserves in this region, including larger protected areas, and it will also be necessary to protect for- 7.3.3 Wetlands est where important environmental qualities can County conservation plans for wetlands have be developed in the long term. resulted in the establishment of more than 600 Various measures can be used in forest as a nature reserves. Overall, a good proportion of the way of achieving Aichi target 11 on area-based, area of peatland has been protected, particularly long-term conservation. Conservation measures in the mountains, but the areas included are not under other legislation and in other sectors can be very representative in geographical terms, par- used for this purpose in addition to the establish- ticularly in the southern parts of the country and ment of nature reserves and national parks in for- along the coast. Wetlands other than peatland in est under the Nature Diversity Act, which pro- the southern half of Norway are underrepre- vides protection against a number of environmen- sented. The Government will consider supple- tal pressures. However, other area-based conser- menting protected wetland areas, particularly in vation measures must provide effective, long-term the lowlands and coastal areas. Areas adjoining protection of areas that support valuable biodiver- existing Ramsar sites will be given priority. The sity. Government will consider the county wetland con- Key biotopes in forest are delimited areas that servation plan for Finnmark as part of the county- are considered to be important for the conserva- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 63 Nature for life tion of biodiversity. Requirements to carry out on threatened species and habitats. This requires inventories of key biotopes and safeguard them a good overview of where the forest areas of high- are included in the voluntary forest certification est conservation value are to be found. As a basis schemes used in Norway, PEFC and FSC, and in for effective forest conservation, the Government the forestry legislation. For example, section 5 of therefore intends to initiate habitat mapping of all the regulations on sustainable forestry requires old-growth forest that may be of conservation forest owners to ensure that the value of impor- value. Habitat mapping in regions and forest types tant habitats and key biotopes is safeguarded in that are underrepresented at present will be given accordance with the guidelines in the Norwegian priority in the years ahead. PEFC standard. By 2015, about 70 000 areas cov- ering a total area of about 750 square kilometres had been identified as key biotopes through envi- 7.3.5 Cultural landscapes ronmental inventories. This corresponds to Only a relatively small proportion of most of the almost 1 % of the total area of productive forest. habitat types in cultural landscapes that are impor- Since environmental inventories have not yet been tant for biodiversity has statutory protection. In carried out for all forest properties, the proportion addition, conservation of a representative selec- of productive forest set aside as key biotopes is tion of cultural landscapes requires their active expected to increase. use or management. To ensure the conservation There are certain habitats, such as recently of a more representative selection of cultural land- burned areas and successional stages of broad- scapes, the Government will consider protection leaved forest, that are naturally important for of some areas under the Nature Diversity Act, threatened species for a limited period of time combined with measures such as habitat manage- only. To maintain the diversity of such habitats ment for certain sites where there are rare habitat and the species associated with them, new locali- types or that are of very high quality. Further- ties will need to be established regularly. The vol- more, the Government will improve the manage- untary certification schemes include guidelines ment of semi-natural habitats within existing pro- for changing and replacing key biotopes, with tected landscapes in order to maintain their con- requirements for documentation. Experience so servation value. The Government will consider far indicates that in general, a long-term approach the use of voluntary agreements on the use and is being taken to conservation of key biotopes and conservation of valuable cultural landscapes as a their value for biodiversity. supplement, but emphasises that such agree- In the Government’s view, key biotopes in for- ments can only be applied to the way landowners est should count towards Norway’s achievement use the areas involved, and that they do not of Aichi target 11 on representative, long-term ensure long-term conservation in the event of conservation in forest ecosystems. As a basis for changes in ownership. Norway’s future reporting on progress towards this target, the Ministry of Climate and Environ- ment will in consultation with the Ministry of Agri- 7.3.6 Mountains culture and Food, and after dialogue with PEFC About 35 % of the area of Norway above 900 on technical matters such as data quality, clarify metres above sea level is protected under the the criteria for and the scope of key biotopes that Nature Diversity Act, and roughly 75 % of the total can be included in these reports. area of Norway’s national parks is in the moun- Forest conservation is long-term work and tains. This is the result of the implementation of must therefore be continued after 2020. The Gov- the 1992 national park plan. The proposals in the ernment will expand the scope of voluntary forest national park plan have been implemented, with protection. An evaluation of forest conservation the exception of a few areas in the northernmost will be carried out with a view to identifying meas- counties, mainly Finnmark (see Chapter 7.2). For ures that can contribute to the conservation of a Norway as a whole, a representative selection of representative selection of Norwegian forest eco- mountain ecosystems has now been protected. In systems and valuable biodiversity. the Government’s view, there is therefore no need The Government’s aim is to ensure that area- to expand the area of mountain ecosystems in based forest conservation incorporates the areas order to make the selection more representative that are most important for critically endangered (but see Chapter 6 for a discussion of the conser- species and habitats, in addition to a representa- vation of threatened species and ecosystems). tive selection of forest ecosystems, see Chapter 6 The Government will seek to ensure that the con- 64 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life servation value of existing protected areas in the represented. However, the knowledge base is not mountains is maintained or if necessary restored. good enough for us to determine whether the pro- The preparation of management plans is an impor- tected areas are ecologically representative of all tant tool in this context. Svalbard’s nature. The main task now is to ensure that the protected areas in Svalbard and Jan Mayen are managed in accordance with the pur- 7.3.7 Polar ecosystems pose of protection, so that all habitats are properly Protected areas in Svalbard and Jan Mayen cover safeguarded. The Government considers the man- most of the land areas and territorial waters of the agement plans for the protected area to be the islands. In Svalbard, the protected areas were sup- most important tool in this context. The Govern- plemented and expanded in the period 2002– ment’s proposals for long-term conservation 2006, on the basis of a geographical analysis of the measures under the fisheries management protected areas and their representativeness. The regime are discussed in the sections on marine Government considers that the major ecosystems and coastal waters. in Svalbard and on Jan Mayen are all adequately 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 65 Nature for life

8 Improving knowledge on biodiversity

8.1 Why is knowledge so important? for the public administration and for sound man- agement, and this and other ecological knowledge Norway’s policy is that biodiversity management is built up through research. In addition to must be knowledge-based. This was one of the research results, various types of syntheses, risk key elements of the 2001 white paper on Norway’s assessments, scenarios and cross-disciplinary biodiversity policy (Report No. 42 to the Storting assessments are compiled, and provide valuable (2000–2001)), and is one of the principles on information as a basis for management. which the Nature Diversity Act is based (section Major social and economic change is currently 8). Moreover, Article 112 of the Norwegian Con- taking place and putting pressure on biodiversity. stitution gives every person a right to a healthy Knowledge in the field of social , includ- environment whose productivity and diversity are ing economics, is therefore vital in addition to sci- maintained and to information to enable them to entific knowledge. safeguard this right. A sound knowledge base is A shared, robust knowledge base makes it eas- essential to fulfil these rights. The Environmental ier to agree on decisions and ensures that deci- Information Act (Act of 9 May 2003 No. 31 relating sion-making processes are more effective. Various to the right to environmental information and pub- types of knowledge and information are discussed lic participation in decision-making processes further in the rest of this chapter. relating to the environment) requires both public In order to make good decisions that will safe- authorities and undertakings to hold environmen- guard the environment, it is essential that a sound tal information. The authorities are also required interdisciplinary knowledge base is available for to make environmental information accessible to decision makers and the general public, and that the public, and both authorities and undertakings this knowledge is applied. The environmental must disclose the environmental information they authorities have a responsibility for making sure hold to anyone who asks for it, unless the Act spe- that the necessary knowledge is available, and cifically provides for the information to be that priorities for new knowledge building are exempted from public disclosure. A sound knowl- based on interdisciplinary analyses of where edge base is vital for good management and for knowledge needs are greatest. choosing the right measures to achieve national biodiversity targets. Aichi target 19 states that ‘By 2020, knowledge, the base and technolo- 8.2 Mapping biodiversity and gies relating to biodiversity, its values, function- establishing maps of ecological ing, status and trends, and the consequences of its information for Norway loss, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied.’ Internationally, high priority is being Land conversion and land-use change resulting in given to strengthening the science-policy inter- habitat degradation and fragmentation is the most face, and to ensuring that information is widely serious threat to biodiversity today. It is essential shared and applied. to have spatial data on species, habitats and land- The public administration needs knowledge scapes so that biodiversity can be taken properly and information of various kinds. This includes into account in planning and decision making. spatial data on the natural environment obtained Spatial data can be obtained by conventional map- by mapping and remote sensing, and monitoring ping of biodiversity and by remote sensing. A data to provide information about trends in eco- number of geographical information systems logical status and the causes of change. Informa- (GIS) are available that can capture such data. tion about species (), their relationships Good, up-to-date ecological data is vital for () and their ecology is also needed. sound planning and for finding good, integrated Knowledge about ecological interactions is vital solutions for projects and developments of all 66 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life sizes. If information is available at an early stage, The Naturbase portal run by the Norwegian it is much easier to take valuable biodiversity into Environment Agency is currently an important account. A sound knowledge base can therefore source of spatial data on habitats, and the Species reduce conflict. Decision-making processes will Map run by the Norwegian Biodiversity also become more predictable and effective, since Information Centre provides spatial data on spe- there is less need for the time-consuming process cies. Quality assurance is being carried out for the of obtaining supplementary information. This will data already uploaded to Naturbase. In future, the benefit projects in sectors including transport and Biodiversity Information Centre will play an energy. important part in supplying and coordinating spa- In recent years, Norway has been giving prior- tial data on habitats, ecosystems and landscapes ity to building up knowledge about the distribu- classified using the new Norwegian system. Geo- tion of species and habitats, but there are still graphical areas for which the data is currently major knowledge gaps to be filled. In February incomplete will be given priority in the Govern- 2015, the Storting (Norwegian parliament) ment’s initiative for nature and biodiversity map- debated a proposal on measures for knowledge- ping. based management of Norwegian nature. The Map layers for ecological data are currently Standing Committee on Energy and the Environ- available through various institutions in publicly ment pointed to the need to learn more about spe- available national datasets. Some of these are cies, habitats and ecosystems. A majority of the modelled, while others are based on field surveys. committee agreed that they expected the present Some map layers can be used directly as nation- white paper to describe more specifically how wide datasets showing environmental variation. Norwegian nature and biodiversity is to be Others will need to be further developed or mapped. updated before they can be used in this way. The The Norwegian Environment Agency is start- Government will ensure that over time, a good ing to use a new system for classifying and map- basis for the analysis and modelling of Norwegian ping habitats, ecosystems and landscapes in Nor- nature is built up through cooperation and the way, and has in cooperation with the Norwegian development of such datasets. If maps of the Biodiversity Information Centre begun drawing entire country showing ecological gradients are up the necessary guidance documents and techni- available, this will save time and money, for exam- cal infrastructure. The Government will continue ple by making it possible to decide on more pre- the work of mapping nature and biodiversity and cise priorities for further mapping of Norwegian nature in Norway, in accordance with the recom- nature. mendation from the Standing Committee on The Government considers it necessary to Energy and the Environment. continue mapping of species, habitats and ecosys- Through this process, georeferenced ecologi- tems, landscapes and ecosystem services in Nor- cal data will be obtained and will be used to create way. In the context of land-use management, map- a collection of map layers showing ecological data, ping to obtain biodiversity data that is needed in including where in Norway species and habitats day-to-day decisions on land use and other issues are found. There will be other map layers for spe- that influence environmental pressures is particu- cific environmental variables, which will provide larly important. On this basis, the Government information on where in Norway conditions are will give highest priority to mapping of habitats suitable for particular habitats or species. Some that are threatened, important for many different ecological spatial data are already available from species, provide key ecosystem services, or are various databases. Examples include data on bio- particularly poorly mapped. Priority will also be diversity in protected areas, data in the Naturbase given to geographical areas where mapping will portal (habitat types, species, protected areas and provide most benefits for society, including areas areas set aside for outdoor recreation), species both on land and at sea where the level of human data from the Species Map Service run by the activity is high and that are under great pressure, Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, and and areas where climate change is expected to data on land resources. Specific legislative instru- result in rapid change. The new Norwegian sys- ments apply to some categories of mapped areas. tem for classifying habitats, ecosystems and land- Relevant types of ecological information include scapes is to be used as the basis for public-sector bedrock, soil water content, seawater and mapping of Norwegian nature, in accordance with topography. the Storting’s decision. As part of this work, the Government will assess the need to supplement 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 67 Nature for life the classification of marine habitats and ecosys- between pressures and ecological status requires tems to provide more complete coverage of the monitoring of important pressures such as land range of Arctic marine habitats and ecosystems, conversion and land-use change in addition. including those in icy waters. A number of monitoring programmes have A larger-scale initiative to map nature and bio- already been established and are providing infor- diversity in Norway will require adequate infra- mation on trends in Norwegian ecosystems. Some structure, and cooperation between a number of are run by the environmental authorities and key bodies involved in the production of relevant some by other sectors. Biodiversity is now being map layers will have to be organised and coordi- monitored to some extent in all Norway’s major nated. These bodies include the Geological Sur- ecosystems. vey of Norway, the Norwegian Mapping Authority However, the current monitoring system is and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute. The still inadequate for a number of environmental Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre has pressures and species groups, certain ecosystems developed expertise in this type of coordination are less well covered, and the system does not through its work on red lists and geographical provide sufficiently representative or complete species information, and the development of the geographical coverage. In the Government’s view, new Norwegian system for classifying habitats, the Norwegian environmental monitoring system ecosystems and landscapes. should be reviewed to identify any changes needed to obtain a sound knowledge base and complete geographical coverage. It is important to The Government will: have an overview of trends for those species • Continue ongoing mapping programmes for groups (particularly key species) and habitats we nature and biodiversity in Norway up to 2020. know little about at present, or that are expected • Continue the MAREANO programme for map- to be under growing pressure in future. More ping of the seabed in Norwegian waters. knowledge is also needed about environmental • Integrate existing data on key environmental pressures and impacts. A better knowledge base, variables from various sectors with spatial data including knowledge about the impacts of various on nature and biodiversity in Norway. types of projects and measures, will make it possi- • Further develop and improve databases contai- ble to assess changes in biodiversity more accu- ning spatial data on biodiversity. rately. It is vital to be able to do this so that action • Continue the work of identifying and mapping to safeguard biodiversity can be more clearly tar- particularly valuable and vulnerable marine geted and developments that affect valuable and areas and mapping of old-growth forest of conser- threatened species and habitats can be avoided. vation interest. Monitoring programmes for coastal waters, cul- tural landscapes and wetlands are particularly incomplete. There are also substantial gaps in the 8.3 Monitoring knowledge base for water resource management under the Water Management Regulations, The natural environment changes constantly, in despite improvements in recent years. Norway is some cases as a consequence of human activity. at the forefront of developments internationally as We need to understand environmental trends over regards marine monitoring. The Institute of time and the causes of change. This knowledge Marine Research runs extensive long-term moni- can be acquired through monitoring data obtained toring programmes for Norwegian sea areas. A by field or from satellite data, and number of time series have been running for through research based on monitoring data. Mon- many decades. Despite this, monitoring of marine itoring programmes provide long time series of biodiversity does not fully cover the ecological data. They generally need to be followed up by interactions and complexity of marine ecosys- research to build up knowledge about ecological tems. relationships and the causes of change. Building In the Government’s view, it is also important up knowledge about ecological status and trends to monitor environmental pressures, including in ecosystems requires monitoring programmes land-use change and climate change. New model- for a representative selection of key indicators for based tools for land-use management are needed different ecosystems, in addition to data from ref- to make it possible to model the cumulative erence areas. Developing an understanding of effects of all proposed projects and developments, environmental pressures and relationships and to include the projected responses of ecosys- 68 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life tems to climate change. This is of crucial impor- ons using public funding, with the exception of tance for assessing the impacts of different pres- sensitive data. sures on the environment and the cumulative • Assess how satellite data can be more widely used effects in specific areas. Surveillance monitoring in planning processes and in monitoring changes of ecological status in coastal waters needs to be in biodiversity and in land use nationally and improved. Long time series are needed to under- internationally. stand the causes of change in ecosystems. Moni- • Further develop indicators of land use and other toring programmes are needed as a basis for iden- environmental pressure indicators, including tifying appropriate measures for achieving the tar- identifying suitable indicators for ocean acidifi- get of good ecological status, including meeting cation and climate change. the requirements of the Water Management Regu- • Consider the development of analytical tools for lations. They are also needed to gather sufficient planning processes, for analysing status, trends data to make use of the Nature Index for marine and the causes of trends, and for analysing the and coastal waters. cumulative effects of different types of develop- New satellite-based technology is making it ments and pressures in an area. possible to improve environmental monitoring • Continue and further develop the mapping and and make it more effective. The Copernicus pro- monitoring programme for seabirds. gramme is the EU observation and monitor- • Develop methods and tools for monitoring cli- ing programme, and includes resource manage- mate-related changes in biodiversity. ment, environmental and climate monitoring and • Develop indicators for ecosystem services. emergency management and security. The Gov- ernment will continue Norway’s active role in the Copernicus programme, and will assess when and 8.4 Research and development and how the environmental authorities can benefit by education using satellite data from the programme. Monitor- ing of biodiversity and of the impacts of land-use The environmental authorities need knowledge change and climate change will be of particular derived from research to understand ecological interest in cases where the satellite data provide interactions, ecological functions, causal relation- sufficient management-relevant information. The ships and the effects of different policy instru- quality of satellite data is improving and access to ments. In addition, research based on monitoring the data is becoming easier, providing a better data is needed to build up this kind of knowledge. basis for developing new management tools based Despite considerable progress in recent years, on models used in landscape ecology. These can there are still gaps in our knowledge of biodiver- make it possible to model and analyse the effects sity and ecosystems. This is a very complex field, of land conversion and habitat fragmentation, and covering everything from genetic variation at pop- barrier effects resulting from existing and ulation level to the dynamics of ecosystems. A planned developments. They will also make it pos- great deal of research has been devoted to estab- sible to take into account the projected responses lishing explanatory models for observed changes of biodiversity to climate change in planning pro- in individual populations. More recently, growing cesses. These tools and models will also be useful attention has been focused on higher-level ecosys- in planning transport and energy infrastructure tem interactions, greatly helped by the develop- projects and smaller-scale projects, and will pro- ment of more advanced analytical tools and the vide a better basis for assessing the cumulative growth in computer capacity. At the same time, effects of developments across sectors. our knowledge needs have become more com- plex. Research on resources, pressures and envi- ronmental change is needed to develop knowl- The Government will: edge-based solutions for social and industrial • Ensure that monitoring programmes for ecologi- development. This means that research needs to cal status in all Norway’s major ecosystems are be better integrated and more interdisciplinary, ecologically and geographically representative. with closer links between research in the natural This will include steps to strengthen monitoring sciences, social sciences and humaniora. of ecological status in freshwater and coastal There are major unmet research needs relat- water bodies. ing to biodiversity and ecosystem services. Both • Ensure that there is public access to all monitor- research and monitoring initiatives are needed to ing data collected by all types of research instituti- strengthen the knowledge base on the most 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 69 Nature for life important pressures affecting biodiversity and International knowledge generation pro- ecosystem services, including land-use conver- cesses such as the work being carried out by the sion and land-use change, climate change and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ocean acidification. Some research on biodiversity (IPCC) have been very important for Norwegian and climate change is included in Norway’s large- climate research. The Government values this scale programme on climate research, KLIMA- work and also wishes Norway to play an impor- FORSK. However, there is a clear need for tant role in the recently established Intergovern- research focusing specifically on questions relat- mental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity ing to the loss of biodiversity, and for stronger and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), which is mod- integration of research on biodiversity, climate elled on the IPCC. Its work focuses on the impor- change and other environmental issues. Research tance of biodiversity and ecosystem services for on land-use change must have a place in new human well-being. It takes an interdisciplinary research programmes that will continue environ- approach and will in the next few years generate mental and marine research. knowledge and make recommendations in areas The Government expects the new MILJØ- such as pollination and food production, invasive FORSK programme (Programme for Environ- alien species, policy support tools such as sce- mental Research for a Green Transition) to fund nario analysis, valuation and global research that will help to meet the knowledge assessments of status and trends. The IPBES has needs relating to biodiversity discussed earlier in a Technical Support Unit on Capacity Building in this chapter. In the Government’s view, there is Trondheim in Norway, which is to assist with the also a need for the Research Council of Norway capacity building part of the work programme. and the ministries that fund research to The unit is located in the premises of the Norwe- strengthen their cooperation and scale up co-fund- gian Environment Agency, which is also Norway’s ing across sectors. A good framework should also national focal point for the IPBES. The Govern- be provided for stronger cooperation between ment will continue Norway’s involvement in the environmental and industry-oriented research work of the IPBES and will encourage Norwegian programmes. experts to play an active part in this international Internationalisation, and European research cooperation and in formulating mandates, meth- cooperation in particular, has helped to improve odology and tools for its work. research results. Horizon 2020 is the world’s larg- The establishment of Norwegian research est research and innovation programme, with centres such as the Fram Centre in Tromsø, the funding of EUR 80 billion available over a seven- Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research in Bergen year period (2014–2020). Research groups, the and the Oslo Centre for Interdisciplinary Environ- public sector and companies in Norway can take mental and Social Research (CIENS) strengthens part in the same way as colleagues and competi- research groups and promotes broader-based tors in other European countries. Research and interdisciplinary cooperation. However, in the funding are being divided between three pro- field of the conservation and use of biodiversity gramme sections: excellent science, industrial and ecosystem services, there has been no centre leadership and societal challenges. Seven key responsible for cross-disciplinary applied societal challenges have been identified. These research and for communicating results. Given are health, demographic change and wellbeing; the requirements for knowledge-based manage- food security, sustainable agriculture and forestry, ment that follow from the Nature Diversity Act, marine and maritime and inland water research, implementation of the Convention on Biological and the bioeconomy; secure, clean and efficient Diversity, the establishment of IPBES and the energy; smart, green and integrated transport; cli- growing priority being given to ecosystem ser- mate action, environment, resource efficiency and vices (for example in Official Norwegian Report raw materials; Europe in a changing world – inclu- NOU 2013:10 on the value of ecosystem services), sive, innovative and reflective societies; and the Research Council of Norway has supported a secure societies – protecting freedom and security review of the case for establishing such a centre of Europe and its citizens. In June 2014, the Gov- by the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, ernment presented a strategy for research and NTNU (the Norwegian University of Science and innovation cooperation with the EU. One of its Technology) and the Norwegian Biodiversity goals is greater Norwegian participation in Hori- Information Centre. As a follow up to the review, zon 2020. the Centre for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Ser- vices (CeBES) has now been established through 70 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Figure 8.1 The national park centres play an important role in communicating information about nature and the outdoors. Here a school class is learning about Norway’s national parks. Photo: Norwegian Mountain Museum/Visitors’ Centre for Jotunheimen, Reinheimen and Breheimen National Parks formalised cooperation between NTNU, the Nor- eration with other Nordic countries. The research wegian Institute for Nature Research, the Norwe- school cooperates with similar initiatives at Nor- gian Institute of Bioeconomy Research (NIBIO) dic and European level, and is administered by the and SINTEF. The aim is for the Centre to become Museum at the University of a national hub for innovative, interdisciplinary Oslo. The Government considers it to be very research and development and dissemination, and important that research groups at universities and thus contribute to national and global efforts for colleges are large enough to ensure that expertise biodiversity conservation and sustainable devel- in such basic fields is not lost. The Government opment. The Research Council is also supporting will continue to support the Research School in the scheme for Centres of Excellence in research. Biosystematics. Species and habitats have lost ground as a The foundation for future expertise in and research field and study area at Norwegian uni- research on biodiversity and the environment is versities and colleges in recent years. The Stort- laid during primary and secondary education. ing has also called attention to this. The Ministry Curricula, teachers’ qualifications and the content of Education and Research (via funding for the of teaching plans all play a vital part in giving Research Council of Norway) and the Ministry of pupils an insight into and understanding of the Climate and Environment (via funding for the world’s major environmental problems. Knowl- Norwegian Taxonomy Initiative run by the Nor- edge about biodiversity, important drivers of bio- wegian Biodiversity Information Centre) have diversity loss and possible solutions to the prob- together strengthened researcher recruitment to lems must all be included in the teaching pro- the field by providing strategic funding for the grammes. It is also important that these subjects national Research School in Biosystematics. The are taught in a way that encourages the recruit- school was established with co-funding from the ment of students and researchers, both to the sub- Research Council, and is a good platform for coop- ject itself and to more interdisciplinary research 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 71 Nature for life

Map ecosystems (mapping and monitoring, national databases, etc.)

Assess the condition of ecosystems Assess ecosystem services (syntheses of indicators, e.g. (indicators, data and models) the Norwegian Nature Index)

Research (integrated ecosystem assessment) How does condition relate to service provision? How do different ecosystem types interact to provide services?

Figure 8.2 Mapping ecosystems and their services Outline of a common framework for mapping ecosystems and their services, based on Figure 2 in EU Technical Report 2014 – 080, Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. The figure shows that an assessment of ecosystem services should be ba- sed on both mapping and monitoring data and a synthesis of information provided by indicators that give a picture of the overall condition of an ecosystem. In addition, research and analysis are needed to understand more about how the condition of ecosys- tems is related to their capacity to provide ecosystem services. into complex environmental problems and solu- ecosystems on the basis of selected indicators, tions. The Sustainable Backpack programme will data and models. This framework will be used as a be continued. This is a nationwide initiative by the basis for the European assessment report to be Ministry of Education and Research and the Min- drawn up for the IPBES, and will therefore also istry of Climate and Environment to support Nor- have implications for the Norwegian data used in wegian schools in implementing Education for the report. Norway has done a great deal to Sustainable Development (ESD). From the school improve the knowledge base on biodiversity in year 2016/2017, the Government is introducing recent years, by scaling up funding for mapping one extra lesson a week in the natural sciences, programmes, through the Norwegian Taxonomy which schools may teach in year 5, 6 or 7. This Initiative and monitoring programmes, and by will mean that pupils receive an extra 40 hours’ producing knowledge syntheses. Thus, good pro- teaching in the natural sciences. gress has already been made in Norway in synthe- The Government’s long-term plan for research sising information from indicators so that overall and higher education emphasises the need for ecosystem condition or ecological status can be more knowledge about the most serious environ- assessed. However, Norway has not yet identified mental threats, including the loss of biodiversity. relevant indicators and data for assessing ecosys- It also identifies the need to learn more about tem services, and there are no reviews of the over- interactions between climate change and other all relationship between ecological status and the environmental pressures and how different envi- provision of ecosystem services. Norway will con- ronmental and climate-related measures can sup- tinue to support the work of the IPBES. In connec- port each other. The Government will address tion with this, the Ministry of Climate and Envi- these knowledge needs as part of the work of ronment will initiate a review of selected ecosys- implementing the long-term plan. tem services in consultation with relevant sectors. The EU has developed a common assessment The work will be based on existing knowledge. framework for mapping ecosystems and their ser- vices in the EU countries (see Figure 8.1). This involves assessing ecosystem condition on the The Government will: basis of data from mapping, monitoring and data- • Continue funding for the Research School in bases and using relevant indicators, and assessing Biosystematics. ecosystem services provided by different types of • Continue to support the work of the IPBES. 72 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

8.5 Traditional knowledge communities’ traditional knowledge of species and landscapes, and not least, our awareness of Traditional knowledge about sustainable manage- our own place in nature, is gradually disappearing. ment of the natural environment has been a key Museums and archives in Norway have collected element throughout Norway’s history. Traditional and systematised information about traditional knowledge has been kept alive by coastal fisher- uses of nature, particularly traditional agriculture, men who also graze livestock on coastal heaths but also use of uncultivated areas. Information has and islands, through traditional Sami reindeer also been collected in connection with research husbandry, and by farmers who have supple- on topics such as the cultural landscape. A great mented conventional arable land with hay fens, deal can be done to improve contact between peo- transhumance and summer farms, and wild rein- ple working in the scientific and cultural heritage deer hunting. People have used natural resources fields. Little use has been made of this source for food, medicine and as raw materials (for exam- material by the environmental authorities, and lit- ple for and building materials), and there tle has been done to make empirical knowledge are many customs, rituals and a large body of tra- available to people working in other fields and to ditional lore linked to different species. Most of the general public. Traditional knowledge must be the land area of Norway is or has been used in made accessible in accordance with guidelines some way by people. Coastal waters have also under the Convention on Biological Diversity, and been actively used in a variety of ways. Tradition- it is essential to ensure that access is given with ally, people harvested a much wider range of the of indigenous and local communities. resources than they do today. In many areas, this This is particularly important when giving access has resulted in the development of characteristic to traditional knowledge relating to genetic mate- biotopes, each with its specific fauna and flora. rial developed by indigenous and local communi- Traditional knowledge can explain a great deal ties. about today’s landscapes, and is important for In Sami areas of Norway, traditional knowl- people’s sense of pride in their local history and edge is being retained because nature is still culture and for maintaining its integrity. Tradi- being used in the traditional ways. This means tional knowledge is often not written down, but that there is a large body of knowledge unique to consists of experience and knowledge that is the Sami culture that it is important to safeguard passed down through the generations in oral form for both current and future generations. Little has and through its practical application. been done to synthesise knowledge relating to Section 8 of the Nature Diversity Act requires Sami traditions and other traditional knowledge in the authorities to attach importance to any tradi- Norway and make it accessible. tional knowledge that is available when making Two projects on traditional knowledge of official decisions that will affect Norwegian nature initiated by the Government are currently nature. Traditional knowledge is often valuable for in progress, one specifically on Sami traditional the public authorities in decision-making pro- knowledge and one on people and the natural her- cesses. Such knowledge is vital when semi-natural itage more generally. They are both making a val- habitats and landscapes are being restored and uable contribution to collecting and systematising managed. The provisions of the Nature Diversity traditional knowledge, but this is far from enough Act are based on similar provisions in the Conven- to safeguard traditional knowledge for the future. tion on Biological Diversity (Article 8 j)). Regula- In addition, Norway is participating in cooperation tions on traditional knowledge associated with under the Arctic Council on the integration of tra- genetic material are being drawn up under the ditional knowledge into projects dealing with Nature Diversity Act. They will implement Nor- indigenous peoples’ use of species and ecosys- way’s obligations under the Nagoya Protocol on tems in the Arctic. Access and Benefit-sharing. The regulations are intended to ensure that the interests of indige- nous and local communities are safeguarded and The Government will: respected when others make use of their tradi- • Continue work to safeguard, systematise, collect tional knowledge on genetic material. and communicate traditional knowledge that In recent generations, there has been a steep promotes sustainable use, and facilitate interdis- decline in traditional knowledge of nature in Nor- ciplinary cooperation. way, and more and more of our cultural and natu- • Continue to spread information about traditio- ral heritage is being lost. This means that local nal ways of using nature, increase awareness of 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 73 Nature for life

the importance of safeguarding biodiversity and 8.7 Syntheses, risk assessments and encourage local participation and engagement analyses in the management of protected areas. The public administration also needs information from various types of syntheses and risk assess- 8.6 Access to information ments, and projections and scenarios for future trends. This information must be provided by Knowledge can only be applied if databases and experts in the relevant fields. Examples of such map applications are used to make information products in Norway include the Red List of Spe- publicly available. The information must be easy cies and the Norwegian Red List for Ecosystems to find and use, and it must be presented in a way and Habitat Types. These are both based on risk that is suitable for a variety of user groups. Access assessments – of the risk that species will become is currently provided through many different data- extinct in Norway and that habitats will be lost, bases and applications, developed for a variety of respectively. Others are the publication Alien spe- purposes, dealing with many different topics and cies in Norway – with the Norwegian Black List targeting different user groups. (based on ecological risk assessments for alien Norway has made good progress in develop- species), and the Norwegian Nature Index. Pro- ing tools and services to provide information on jections and scenarios of future pressures on bio- Norwegian nature. This is partly because there is diversity are important because they allow predic- national consensus on data sharing: that institu- tions of change and make it possible to adapt the tions holding environmental data should have management regime accordingly. We need knowl- agreements to share this with others, within a edge of this kind about climate change and ocean common framework and using common stand- acidification, and also about other important pres- ards. Nevertheless, information is still somewhat sures such as habitat fragmentation. Knowledge fragmented. Applications and databases should be about future impacts of climate change is based further developed and improved to take advan- on climate models. The IPCC is responsible for tage of technological developments. This will assessing and summarising knowledge about make it easier for municipalities to make use of global- and regional-scale climate change in its the information in their day-to-day work, and also reports, and the IPBES for producing reports of help other users and the general public. the same type on biodiversity and ecosystem ser- On 19 December 2014, Norway adopted regu- vices. Similar reports are also published at lations on environmental impact assessment for national level; for example, Norway published a plans under the Planning and Building Act and for report on the impacts of climate change in the projects under sectoral legislation. These include Norwegian Arctic in 2010. There is also a good provisions intended to ensure that impact assess- deal of regional cooperation on syntheses and ments maintain high scientific standards and that assessments of biodiversity, for example within data collected in connection with an impact the framework of the Arctic Council. assessment can be re-used. Guidelines on recog- The Government considers it important to nised and the databases to be used continue to present syntheses of knowledge such for uploading data have been published. as those mentioned above. They provide informa- tion that forms an important basis for the work of the public administration, and is also valuable for The Government will: the general public and decision makers. • Ensure that data and databases for biodiversity maintain high quality. • Further develop, improve and simplify national The Government will: databases to ensure good access to environmental • Ensure that Norwegian Biodiversity Informa- information for decision makers and the general tion Centre presents regular updates of the red public, and consider better coordination of data- lists for species and for habitat types and ecosys- bases and more widespread sharing of data. tems. • Improve Norway’s land-use and environmental • Ensure that the Norwegian Biodiversity Infor- statistics. mation Centre presents ecological risk assess- • Ensure that as far as possible, all environmental ments for alien species, and a Norwegian black data collected are uploaded to public databases. list, every five years. 74 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

• Ensure that the Norwegian Nature Index is • Give priority to cooperation with neighbouring updated every five years. countries and within the framework of the Arctic • Develop and apply methodology and tools for Council on the preparation of regional syntheses establishing and displaying projections of ecosys- and projections of pressures on biodiversity. tem change and shifts in the distribution of spe- cies and habitats in response to climate change, ocean acidification and other pressures. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 75 Nature for life

9 Responsibilities of local and regional authorities

9.1 Nature as a resource for Norway’s c. protect the base for the Sami municipalities culture, economic activity and way of life, d. facilitate value creation and industrial and com- Nature itself is one of the most important mercial development, resources for Norway’s municipalities. It is the e. facilitate good design of the built environment, basis for human settlement and industrial and a good residential environment, a child-friendly commercial activities, provides opportunities for environment and good living standards in all recreation and contributes to people’s sense of parts of the country, identity. Municipalities are showing a growing f. promote public health and counteract social ine- interest in broad-based value creation based on qualities in health, and help to prevent crime, both natural and cultural resources. The munici- g. incorporate climate change considerations, for palities take all these factors into account in their example in energy supply, land-use and trans- planning, since this is important in making local port solutions, communities attractive to business and industry h. strengthen civil protection by reducing the and as places to live. It should therefore be part of risks of loss of life, injury to health and damage the local authorities’ responsibilities to ensure to the environment and important infrastruc- proper management of the natural environment. ture, material assets, etc.

A healthy natural environment is essential for 9.2 Land-use planning as an achieving most of these purposes, but the degree instrument for biodiversity to which nature and environmental considerations management are incorporated into municipal plans varies con- siderably from one municipality to another. 9.2.1 General application of the Planning Municipal plans often make it clear which areas and Building Act should be used for development and commercial The Planning and Building Act provides the activities, but are less specific about areas that municipalities with a very important instrument in should be safeguarded. their efforts to safeguard Norwegian nature. Aichi target 2 highlights the importance of Together, all the individual decisions made under integrating the values of biodiversity into local the Act strongly influence the development of development strategies and planning processes. Norwegian society and how successfully biodiver- In Norway, the municipalities play a key role in sity is safeguarded in both the long term and the drawing up such strategies and plans. A good short term. Large, robust municipalities with planning process can identify important compo- good nature management capacity and expertise nents of biodiversity in a municipality and areas can play an effective role in achieving national and that are important for connectivity and ecological international targets relating to biodiversity. coherence. Systematic planning can also clarify Section 3-1 of the Planning and Building Act what additional information is needed about requires municipal plans to: nature in a municipality. A good planning process a. establish goals for the physical, environmental, is one that ensures that residents, interest organi- economic, social and cultural development of sations, the business sector, landowners and oth- municipalities and regions, identify social ers all take part, and where regional and central needs and tasks, and indicate how these tasks government authorities also participate and pro- can be carried out, vide guidance from an early stage. Planning pro- b. safeguard land resources and landscape quali- cesses that integrate biodiversity considerations ties and ensure the conservation of valuable will make an important contribution to Norway’s landscapes and cultural environments, achievement of Aichi target 2. 76 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Planning routines for housing developments, In the case of transport infrastructure projects, industrial development, transport infrastructure the central government transport authorities can and other sectors that also incorporate biodiver- reach agreement with the municipal and regional sity considerations require land-use management planning authorities to take over part of their nor- based on close cooperation and clear priorities. mal role in preparing regional and municipal sub- Preparation of the social and land-use elements of plans and zoning plans. This is set out in section 3- the municipal master plan also gives the municipal 7 of the Planning and Building Act. Transport authorities the opportunity to consider both land infrastructure plans are processed and adopted in and water areas of the municipality as an inte- accordance with the Act’s ordinary provisions. grated whole. The social and the land-use ele- This means that the county authorities normally ments of a municipal master plan can both appro- make decisions on regional sub-plans and the priately be used to set overall long-term priorities, municipalities on municipal sub-plans and zoning including priorities for the conservation of impor- plans. However, in the case of major transport tant species and habitats. In addition, the Planning infrastructure projects, central government land- and Building Act’s provisions on zoning plans use plans may be drawn up instead. In such cases, allow for more detailed specification of how biodi- the Ministry of Local Government and Moderni- versity is to be safeguarded. The provisions on sation has the authority to make planning deci- both the land-use element of the municipal master sions. The Government has indicated that central plan and zoning plans provide for areas to be des- government land-use plans will be more widely ignated as green structure (nature areas, green used for large-scale transport projects. corridors, recreation areas and parks); as agricul- Regional master plans and municipal master tural areas, areas of natural environment, outdoor plans that include guidelines or set a framework recreation areas and/or reindeer husbandry for future developments, and zoning plans that areas; and areas for use or conservation in the sea could have substantial effects on the environment and river systems and along the shoreline. In the and society, must include a description and land-use element of a municipal master plan, it is assessment of the effects of the plan on the envi- also possible to designate zones where special ronment and society, including its effects on biodi- considerations apply, for example as regards out- versity. This is required by the regulations on door recreation, the green structure, the land- environmental impact assessment for projects scape, or conservation of the natural or cultural under the Planning and Building Act. The purpose environment – for example in buffer zones around is to ensure that the possible impacts of develop- national parks or protected landscapes. The same ments are taken into account, and to ensure an zones may be designated in the zoning plan, or open process in which all stakeholders can make alternatively, their purpose can be achieved by their opinions heard. Norway has two sets of reg- specifying permissible types of land-use and lay- ulations on environmental impact assessment, for ing down other appropriate provisions. When pro- plans under the Planning and Building Act and for cessing building applications, the municipality can projects under sectoral legislation. Guidelines influence matters such as where buildings are have been published on recognised methodology, placed on a site, which can be important for biodi- the databases to be used for uploading data, and versity conservation. Provided that certain condi- on Appendix III of the regulations on how to tions are met, municipalities may grant exemp- assess whether a project will have significant tions from the provisions of their plans. This effects on the environment and society. means that the strictness or leniency of the prac- Some sectors have drawn up further guidance tice they follow when considering exemptions on environmental impact assessment within their may have implications for trends in ecological sta- areas of responsibility, as the transport sector has tus in the ecosystems concerned. done. Regional plans are drawn up by the county authorities. They are particularly important for habitats and species whose distribution extends 9.2.2 Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity across municipal and county boundaries. The Land-use conversion and land-use change is the regional approach has for example been used in most important driver of biodiversity change in drawing up plans for the seven national conserva- Norway today. It is therefore vital to ensure that tion areas for wild reindeer in the mountains in the there is an integrated planning system in which southern half of Norway. Such plans can contain effects on biodiversity are considered for larger binding regional planning provisions on land use. areas and larger numbers of projects and develop- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 77 Nature for life ments at the same time. The land-use element of sity plan would be adopted through a political pro- the municipal master plan is a key part of the long- cess, and would provide guidelines for how biodi- term basis for municipal planning. It is intended to versity considerations should be incorporated into show how community development is linked to the municipal master plan, for example by specify- future land use, and how important areas of natu- ing permissible types of land-use, laying down ral environment will be safeguarded. It is required other appropriate provisions or designating areas to indicate both development and conservation where special considerations apply. The county needs. Identifying important habitats and ecosys- governors would, as they normally do, give the tems and analysing their connectivity and ecologi- municipalities information on biodiversity and cal coherence is a complex task that requires an guidance on the best ways of incorporating biodi- overall analysis. It is a challenging task to inte- versity considerations into their plans. There is no grate such analyses into work on a municipal mas- provision for making objections to a municipal ter plan, and as a result there is considerable vari- sub-plan, but in the Government’s view, the plan- ation in how fully biodiversity is included in ning work would provide good opportunities for municipal planning processes. dialogue and cooperation between municipalities If the overall framework for land-use and com- and county governors at an early stage. This could munity development, including biodiversity con- reduce or prevent conflict and objections at a later siderations, has already been assessed, clarified stage, during the preparation of municipal master and incorporated into the municipal master plan, it plans. will be possible to deal with detailed plans for Under the procedural requirements of the housing developments, commercial activities, Planning and Building Act, local residents, inter- infrastructure development and other matters est groups, the business sector and others would more quickly and predictably. This will benefit need to be involved in the planning process for local communities, the business sector and other municipal biodiversity plans, thus supporting the stakeholders. At present, detailed planning pro- goal of strengthening local democracy. The plan- cesses are in a number of cases delayed by time- ning process would not only clarify which nation- consuming conflicts between environmental and ally and regionally important biodiversity munici- other interests. To a large extent, these conflicts palities should safeguard, but would also be an should have been resolved during the preparation opportunity for them to identify locally important of municipal master plans. More purposeful work biodiversity. Where appropriate, municipalities to identify biodiversity values during the prepara- could also seek to create synergies between biodi- tion of municipal master plans would pave the way versity conservation and safeguarding outdoor for better integrated and more predictable munici- recreation areas that are important for local resi- pal nature management. It would also put the dents. The identification of biodiversity of national municipalities in a better position to implement importance would also be useful for the central their land-use policy. government. Section 11-1 of the Planning and Building Act The Government would like to emphasise the provides for the municipalities to draw up munici- importance of leaving it to the municipal councils pal sub-plans for specific topics. Municipal sub- themselves to decide whether or not to start the plans for biodiversity, in which biodiversity of preparation of a municipal biodiversity plan. In local, regional and national importance is identi- many cases, it will be easier to draw up the land- fied and taken into account, will provide valuable use element of the municipal master plan if a bio- input for more thorough processes to find a bal- diversity sub-plan is already in place. Neverthe- ance between different interests when the land-use less, municipalities must be able to incorporate element of the municipal master plan is prepared. biodiversity considerations directly into the land- In the Government’s view, a better framework is use element of the municipal master plan without needed to encourage municipalities to obtain an first preparing up a biodiversity sub-plan if they overview of biodiversity within their boundaries consider this to be a better approach. There is no and identify species and areas that it is important question of requiring municipalities to draw up to safeguard, and to do so at an early stage of biodiversity sub-plans. However, the Government preparations for the municipal master plan. will encourage municipalities to do so and will Municipal sub-plans for biodiversity would not take steps to facilitate this approach. The central be legally binding, but their preparation would government could provide financial assistance for provide opportunities for broad participation and the preparation of biodiversity sub-plans as one political discussions about priorities. A biodiver- way of encouraging this. 78 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life

Municipalities that draw up biodiversity sub- palities themselves to define which areas, species plans will incur costs, but these may be partly off- and habitats it is particularly important to safe- set by efficiency gains in the subsequent planning guard at local level. The municipalities must regis- process. Work on municipal biodiversity sub-plans ter and map such areas as a basis for including will also supplement the work being done at cen- them in biodiversity sub-plans, see Chapter 9.2.2. tral government level on valuing and safeguarding This work will be an important supplement to the biodiversity and ecosystem services. It will also conservation of areas of national importance, as boost biodiversity expertise in the municipalities. described in Chapters 6 and 7. The Government The Government will initiate a pilot project on will consider more closely how registration and municipal sub-plans as a biodiversity conservation mapping of locally important areas, species and tool. It may also be appropriate to include other habitats should be organised. models for incorporating biodiversity into munici- The Directorate for Cultural Heritage is cur- pal planning processes in the project. The pilot rently running a programme to modernise cul- project will be carried out in selected municipali- tural heritage management and make it more ties in 2016 and 2017, and will then be evaluated. effective. For this to be successful, it is essential Inter-municipal cooperation on incorporating to build up cultural heritage expertise in the biodiversity considerations into municipal plan- municipalities. The Directorate has drawn up ning processes would be useful. It would allow guidelines to assist the municipalities in drawing close coordination across municipal boundaries. up cultural heritage sub-plans. The Government This would benefit biodiversity directly and could will consider whether elements of this pro- also be important in ensuring the smooth running gramme are also applicable to efforts to build up of road construction projects and other major municipal expertise and engagement on biodiver- infrastructure projects. sity. The Government is also seeking to simplify the administrative system for uncultivated areas. The Government has also initiated a reform of The Government will: local and regional government, which is intended • Initiate a pilot project on the use of municipal to result in more robust municipalities with the sub-plans as a biodiversity conservation tool. necessary scientific expertise and capacity. The Government’s efforts to build up knowledge about nature and make this available will provide a 9.3 Municipal capacity, expertise and vital basis for continued municipal work on biodi- commitment versity in the planning context, see Chapter 8.

The municipalities must have sufficient adminis- trative capacity, sound scientific expertise in The Government will: nature management, knowledge about biodiver- • Ensure that there is adequate scientific expertise sity in the municipality and adequate management in nature management in the municipalities. expertise to be able to draw up good plans that ensure sustainable management and land use and prevent the loss of biodiversity. An Official Norwe- 9.4 The municipal revenue system gian Report (NOU 2013:10) on the values related to ecosystem services highlights the crucial National parks and other protected areas are importance of strengthening the expertise of the established to safeguard national interests and municipal sector to ensure sound management of meet international obligations. They can be seen ecosystems and ecosystem services. as public goods of substantial value, but the If municipalities are actively involved in biodi- municipalities that are directly affected only bene- versity conservation, public interest and engage- fit from them to a limited extent. Revenue from ment may also be stimulated. This in turn can nature-based tourism, for example, does benefit help to keep biodiversity on the municipal policy the municipalities, but the overall national value agenda over time. But this kind of positive feed- derived from these areas may be much greater back only works if municipal politicians, the local than this. And although protected areas do have a administration and residents all feel a sense of value for local communities, the way they can be ownership of the biodiversity values that need to used is restricted, and this may entail a risk of the be safeguarded. In this context, the Government loss of municipal revenue: protection may hamper would like to emphasise that it is up to the munici- the development of commercial activities in pro- 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 79 Nature for life tected areas. The municipalities do not receive pal planning strategies and plans, and they also any financial compensation for these potential apply to central government participation in these losses, although they take the risk on behalf of the planning processes. The Government expecta- nation as a whole. This situation has been high- tions highlight the importance of identifying and lighted by two Official Norwegian Reports, NOU safeguarding important species, habitats and eco- 2009:16 on global environmental problems and system services. Norwegian policy, and NOU 2013:10 on the values Section 11-1, second paragraph, of the Plan- related to ecosystem services. Both reports rec- ning and Building Act makes it clear that munici- ommended changes so that there is better har- pal master plans must take municipal, regional mony between responsibilities and incentives. In and central government interests into account. NOU 2013:10, one of the recommendations is to Moreover, the objects clause of the Local Govern- carry out a review of a system of economic incen- ment Act requires arrangements to be made for tives for municipalities to safeguard biodiversity rational and effective administration of common and ecosystem services. The report also recom- municipal and county interests within the overall mends reconsidering whether to use a model that framework of Norwegian society and with a view includes a municipality’s environmental efforts to sustainable development. and performance as criteria when block grants The Government considers it important that are allocated. the municipalities have a considerable degree of In principle, block grants are intended to allo- freedom to set land-use management priorities. At cate funding to the municipalities on the basis of the same time, there are many divergent and their real needs in terms of expenses, using crite- sometimes conflicting interests that must be iden- ria that the municipalities themselves have no con- tified and weighed up against each other during trol over. Rewarding actual environmental efforts planning processes. The central government and/or performance would therefore be in con- administration must clarify which components of flict with the principles for awarding block grants. biodiversity are of national or regional value and A criterion based on the total protected area in a must therefore be given special consideration, municipality would be technically possible to use, and must provide the best possible knowledge and this is determined by central government base on biodiversity for use in municipal land-use decisions, not by municipal decisions. However, planning. It is also a central government responsi- this criterion would reflect a potential loss of reve- bility to provide guidance with a view to moderat- nue, not necessary expenses, and there is little ing the cumulative environmental effects of reason to assume that a possible loss of revenue is human activity. Documents that have been pro- proportional to the area protected. Moreover, pro- duced relating to the Planning and Building Act tected areas may also offer opportunities for value include guidelines on planning the green struc- creation in municipalities, as mentioned earlier, ture in towns and built-up areas and on planning and this can be difficult to include in the calcula- holiday housing. tions. This issue has already been discussed in the To ensure that national and significant 2011 proposition to the Storting on local govern- regional interests are taken into account, relevant ment, and the Government maintains its position central government and regional bodies and the that this should not be included in the set of crite- Sámediggi (Sami parliament) are entitled to raise ria for allocating block grants to the municipali- objections to drafts of the land-use element of ties. municipal master plans or zoning plans. Other municipalities that are affected may also raise objections if the issues involved are of significance 9.5 Guidance on integrating to them. The right to put forward objections is biodiversity into planning contingent on a preceding administrative process processes allowing real participation by and cooperation between the sectoral authorities, the county and The municipalities are required to take overall the municipality. To prevent unnecessarily large central government and regional interests into numbers of objections concerning biodiversity, account in their planning. New official Govern- the Government considers it important for the ment expectations for regional and municipal county governor to provide information and planning were adopted by royal decree on 12 June advice on valuable biodiversity in the municipali- 2015. The county and municipal councils must use ties involved at the earliest possible stage of plan- them as a basis for work on regional and munici- ning processes. A good dialogue between the 80 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 2015–2016 Nature for life county governor and the municipalities will be conducive to land-use planning that strikes a satis- factory balance between biodiversity interests and other public interests. The Government wishes to strengthen local democracy, reduce the number of objections to plans and facilitate a greater degree of local adap- tation of land-use policy. Its main approach is to encourage more use of thematic municipal sub- plans, is intended to make it easier for the munici- palities to incorporate biodiversity conservation into planning processes. To give the municipali- ties a more predictable framework, the Govern- ment will draw up better guidance documents that clarify how they are expected to include biodiver- sity considerations in their planning activities. In this connection, the Government will also review Figure 9.1 Green spaces in Oslo existing guidance material with a view to improv- Green spaces in Oslo and areas lost in the period 1999–2004 ing and simplifying the documents. Revision of Source: Engelien with more 2005 the guidelines for planning in coastal waters has already been started. Climate change adaptation is becoming a par- between the different green spaces in towns and ticularly important task for the municipalities. The other built-up areas make it possible for many spe- ecosystem services provided by nature can play a cies to move between them, thus promoting the major role in climate change adaptation, particu- spread of biodiversity and genetic diversity. Green larly regulating services such as natural flood con- spaces are also important because they give peo- trol, and protection against ero- ple opportunities for enjoying the outdoors and sion. Another factor that must be taken into con- outdoor recreation and play. At the same time, sideration in connection with climate change is there is constant pressure to allow development of whether special measures will be needed for habi- these areas. In built-up areas, artificial habitats tat types that may be particularly seriously can often function as substitute biotopes for spe- affected by climate change. The municipalities cies in built-up areas. Innovative examples of this will have a substantial need for advice in this field include green roofs and walls. in the time ahead. Some towns have begun to restore areas of natural habitat. This can be encouraged through urban planning and development processes. A The Government will: number of culverted rivers and have been • Continue to develop guidance material for muni- re-opened so that they form part of the green cipalities on how to integrate biodiversity conser- structure. vation into their activities. Although towns and built-up areas are heavily • Develop guidance material for municipalities on modified ecosystems, there is considerable poten- how they can make use of ecosystem services in tial for retaining areas within them that are of their climate change adaptation work. importance for biodiversity. Safeguarding the environment also has positive effects on people’s well-being and the quality of their . 9.6 Biodiversity in towns and built-up Green spaces in towns and built-up areas are areas under pressure, and the total area of such spaces is declining. At the same time, many threatened Many towns and built-up areas in Norway are in species and habitats are found in and around or near productive areas in the lowlands and along urban areas. The Government therefore consid- the coast, which have always been attractive areas ers it important that existing instruments, particu- for human settlement. Biodiversity was originally larly the Planning and Building Act, are used to very high in these areas, and they still contain safeguard biodiversity in towns and built-up areas, patches of natural habitat and habitats used by and that the municipalities receive sound guid- many threatened and other species. Connections ance on how to do this. 2015–2016 Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) 81 Nature for life

Many outdoor recreation areas in and near spaces of various types and sizes. Programmes towns and built-up areas are also valuable for bio- such as the initiative for development of the diversity. Work in the outdoor recreation sector is Groruddalen area of eastern Oslo, which involves therefore also important for biodiversity conser- cooperation between the City of Oslo and the Gov- vation in towns. Two examples of initiatives that ernment, are valuable for the area involved. They are relevant in this connection are the national also provide opportunities for exchanging infor- strategy for outdoor recreation and a programme mation with other towns and for developing exam- run by the Norwegian Environment Agency to ples of good practice. The first ten-year period of encourage more physical activity, especially by the Groruddalen initiative is coming to an end, children and young people, and to safeguard more and it will be continued for another ten years from outdoor recreation areas near people’s homes. 2017. Local community development will be one of The Government considers it important to the three main themes from 2017. This will give priority to biodiversity conservation in towns include developing green spaces and waterways and built-up areas. One approach that can be use- near residential areas, which will also play a part ful is cooperation between private- and public-sec- in the conservation of urban biodiversity. tor landowners in developing and managing green Norwegian Ministry Chapter 4–9 of Climate and Environment

Published by: Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment

Public institutions may order additional copies from: Norwegian Government Security and Service Organisation Meld. St. 14 (2015–2016) Report to the Storting (white paper) E-mail: [email protected]

KET T ER RY Internet: www.publikasjoner.dep.no M K Ø K J E L R I I Telephone: + 47 222 40 000 M

0 Nature for life Cover illustration: Marit Hovland 7 9 7 P 3 R 0 I N 41 Print: 07 PrintMedia 11/2016 – Impression 400 TM 0 EDIA – 2 Norway’s national biodiversity action plan