FINAL
17.3.2016
Strategy for the Development of the Fennoscandian Green Belt
Vision
The Green Belt of Fennoscandia is a widely acknowledged transboundary
model area for biodiversity conservation, social well-being, and
environmentally sustainable economic growth generated by the region’s
unique biological and geological diversity and cultural heritage.
CONTENTS
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Background .................................................................................................................................................... 4
3. Current state of the Green Belt ..................................................................................................................... 6
Socio-economic situation and trends in the operational environment of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia 6
Biodiversity and connectivity of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia ................................................................ 8
4. Concept and Vision of the GBF network ....................................................................................................... 9
Vision of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia ..................................................................................................... 9
The concept of the GBF network................................................................................................................... 9
5. GBF Components and Targets ..................................................................................................................... 10
Biodiversity conservation ............................................................................................................................ 10
Research ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
Economic and regional development .......................................................................................................... 11
Social and cultural development ................................................................................................................. 11
Institutional development ........................................................................................................................... 11
Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA) ............................................................. 12
6. Institutional Framework .............................................................................................................................. 13
7. Implementation arrangements ................................................................................................................... 13
8. Monitoring and Evaluation .......................................................................................................................... 14
ANNEX A. SWOT Analysis for the Green Belt of Fennoscandia (GBF Trilateral WG, 10th October 2013) ....... 15
ANNEX B: LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE GREEN BELT OF FENNOSCANDIA ................................................ 17
ANNEX C: Participants of the Future of the GBF –workshops (preparatory strategy workshops) ................. 21
1
Executive Summary
Green Belt of Fennoscandia consists of the unique boreal forests and tundra areas along the borders of
Finland, Russia and Norway. The three countries have agreed on developing the Green Belt of
Fennoscandia into a transboundary ecological network protecting biodiversity and producing valuable
ecosystem services. The long-term vision is to develop the GBF into a widely acknowledged transboundary
model area for biodiversity conservation, bioeconomy, social well-being, and environmentally sustainable
economic growth generated by the region’s unique biological and geological diversity and cultural heritage.
The developmental work will be carried out under six components with the following goals:
Component
Goals
Component 1: Biodiversity
Protection
Development of a network of protected areas and ecological
connections within the three countries to ensure conservation of
biodiversity, as well as sufficient north–south and east–west
connectivity for migration
Component 2: Reseach
Intensified trilateral research cooperation on biodiversity conservation,
climate change, culture and social well-being in the GBF
Component 3: Economic and
regional development
Strengthened sustainable economic and regional development based on
human capacity building and ecosystem services in the GBF area
Component 4: Social and
cultural development
Strengthened livelihoods based on the nature values and cultural
heritage of the GBF area
Component 5: Institutional
development
Intensified cross-border cooperation within the GBF network
Component 6: Communication,
Education, Participation and
Awareness
High level of awareness of the GBF’s unique biological and geological
diversity and their conservation among all stakeholders
Specific indicators with targets for year 2020 are given in the strategy.
Implementation of the strategy will include institutional cooperation between national, regional and local
authorities, institutions and NGOs, and specific projects implemented with external project funding.
Advancing cross-border cooperation is a guiding principle for all implementation activities. National GBF
Working Groups in each participating country will be the main decision-making bodies in charge of the
implementation of the GBF strategy.
2
At trilateral level, GBF cooperation will be coordinated by a trilateral Steering Committee represented by
the Ministry of the Environment of Finland, Ministry of Climate and Environment of Norway and Ministry of
the Natural Resources and Environment of Russian Federation.
GBF is the northernmost part of the wider European Green Belt (EGB) and active cooperation with the
other sections of the EGB will be conducted through participation in the European Green Belt association.
3
2. Background
The GBF is the one of the four sections of the European Green Belt. This extraordinary network of nature
sites with a great ecological value and a living memorial landscape has been preserved along the old border
splitting Europe into East and West for almost 40 years. Many endangered species have found their natural
habitat in border areas as in close proximity to borders nature has been better preserved from the changes
brought by people.
Along more than 12,500 kilometres – from the Barents Sea at the Russian-Norwegian border, along the
Baltic Coast, through Central Europe and the Balkans to the Black Sea – the border zone granted nature a
pause whereby it caters for a unique possibility for conservation and development of valuable habitats as
well as for development of nature-based livelihoods and businesses. Altogether, the European Green Belt
connects 24 countries, the Green Belt of Fennoscandia being its northernmost part divided by Russia,
Finland and Norway.
Already in 1970, satellite pictures showed a dark green belt of old-growth forest along the Finnish-Russian
border. Cooperation between Finland and the Soviet Union in the area of nature conservation was begun in
the 1970s with the signing of a scientific-technical cooperation agreement. The term Green Belt of
Fennoscandia (GBF) was first used in 1992. Thereafter, cooperation in the GBF region has covered research,
cooperation between Finnish, Russian and Norwegian nature protection areas (PAs), as well as institutional
cooperation between environmental authorities.
Based on the good experiences of the cooperation as well as on the developments within the wider
European Green Belt, development of the GBF was officially launched by signing a trilateral (Finland, Russia,
Norway) Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on cooperation for the development of the Green Belt of
Fennoscandia on 17th of February, 2010.
As the northernmost part of the European Green Belt, the core of the GBF is covered by boreal forests, and
in its northern part also tundra areas. Its northern and southern parts are influenced by the Barents Sea
4
and Gulf of Finland, respectively. Culturally, the area is diversified including important minority populations
such as the northern Sàmi population and Karelian population in the Russian side. Livelihoods based on
nature are important for many groups living in the GBF area.
This Strategy for the Development of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia has been developed through a
participatory process with key stakeholders from the three countries during the year 2014. The strategy
process included the following steps:

Guidelines for the Steering Committee and the Working Group of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia
by 2020 were made in trilateral meeting held in Kotka in 2012. In the Guidelines it was agreed that
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is the main framework for developing the Green Belt of
Fennoscandia. It was decided to establish trilateral Steering Committee and Working Group to
prepare, coordinate and follow-up the work on trilateral level.

International conference “Green Belt of Fennoscandia 2013” in Petrozavodsk in October 2013
recommended to set up the system of delineating GBF boundaries and to make other preparations
for the GBF strategy.

In the end of 2013 Finnish Ministry of the Environment (FMoE) launched the GBF project financed
by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland. Its main aim was to support and facilitate formulating
the GBF concept and the vision and objectives for the future cooperation.

In January 2014 the GBF Steering Committee decided to launch a strategic planning process for the
GBF.

The Finnish Ministry of the Environment has been chairing the Steering Committee in 2014 and it
also coordinated the work as well as drafted various working documents.

In spring 2014 four sub-regional preparatory workshops elaborating the potentials and needs for
the development of the GBF were conducted during April – June 2014. The workshops were
attended with multiple stakeholders covering regional and national authorities, managements of
protection areas, research institutions, business community as well as non-governmental
organizations.

Based on the proposals developed in the workshops, drafts for the strategic objectives (Vision and
concept) as well as a logical framework for the Strategy were prepared by the FMoE and the
trilateral working group. They were further discussed in meetings of the GBF Steering Committee
and Trilateral Working Group in Joensuu, Finland during 8.-9.9.2014.

A three-day GBF Dialogue Forum was organized in Kuusamo, Finland during 18-20 November, 2014
to further discuss and develop the Strategy as well as elaborate potential actions.

The Strategy was finally accepted nationally in Finland, Norway and Russia in their own
During the process, the following documents have been prepared:
1) SWOT analysis of the GBF
2) Study on the socio-economic background of the GBF (Socio-economic situation and trends in the
operational environment of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia, University of Eastern Finland, 2014)
3) Report on the regional preparatory workshops
5
4) Proceedings of the Kuusamo GBF Dialogue Forum
All these have provided material for formulating this Strategy.
3. Current state of the Green Belt
Socio-economic situation and trends in the operational environment of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia
The socio-economic features specific for the Green Belt area have been analyzed by the University of
Eastern Finland (Socio-economic situation and trends in the operational environment of the Green Belt of
Fennoscandia, UEF: Spatia, 2014). Two delineations for the operational environment were used in parallel
in the analysis: wider1 and narrow geographical delineation2. Two delineations demonstrate that the areas
of influence change according to variable, sector or theme. Neither of the delineations does however
represent the official delineation of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia which is presented in chapter 4.
1
The wider delineation includes the following NUTS 3 (Norway and Finland) and SNUTS2 regions (Russian Federation), three
regional groupings:
1.
’The northernmost areas’
Region of Lappi (Finland)
Murmansk region (Russia)
Finnmark (Norway)
2.
’Karelia region’
a. Regions of Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Kainuu, Pohjois-Karjala (Finland)
b. Republic of Karelia (Russia)
3.
’Southeast Finland – Russia’
a. St. Petersburg and Leningrad region (Russia)
b. Regions of Kymenlaakso and Etelä-Karjala (Finland)
2
For the narrow delineation, those Russian raions (districts) that are directly located on the Finnish and Norwegian borders have
been included. From Norway and Finland, those municipalities that have easternmost points located within 50 kilometres of the
Finnish-Russian or Norwegian-Russian border have been included. This delineation covers 41 Finnish municipalities, 13 Russian
districts (raions) and 4 Norwegian municipalities (see Appendix 1 for a list of municipalities/raions).
a.
b.
c.
6
Figure 2 'Wide' and 'narrow' delineations of the operational environment of the Green Belt of
Fennoscandia
The Green Belt area is vast and sparsely populated. Distances between urban settlements are long and the
transport infrastructure is limited, particularly in the east-west direction. The GBF area has mostly been
undisturbed periphery where use of natural resources has not been very intensive. Land use is most
intensive in the southern parts of it. Much of the cross-border co-operation activities today are centered
around the three ENPI/ENI CBC programming areas, which are increasingly becoming the ‘lenses’ through
which the border areas are seen and perceived.
The southernmost region (Southeast Finland - Russia) is one of relatively high population densities and
benefits from its geo-economic position between Helsinki (and Northwest Europe) and the St. Petersburg
metropolitan area, which has a higher population number than the entire country of Finland. There is also a
relative large number of medium-sized to large cities and developed transportation network, including the
high-speed Allegro railway connection, in this area. Also the vast majority of border crossings take place in
this area. Demographic development in this area is characterised by moderate decline on the Finnish side
and recent growth on the Russian side. In terms of economic development, the Finnish side has been hit by
the effects of structural change, especially in Kymenlaakso, but has also benefitted from growing Russian
shopping tourism. The Russian side is characterised by economic growth and a, for Russian standards,
diversified economy.
The central (Karelia) region is characterized by vast uninhabited forest on the Russian side, sprinkled with
some smaller to medium-sized urban settlements. The Finnish side is more evenly populated and is location
to regional urban centres such as Oulu, Kajaani and Joensuu and the three regions are quite different in
terms of demographic and economic development. Generally, the northern parts of Pohjois-Karjala and
eastern parts of Kainuu and Pohjois-Pohjanmaa are already very sparsely populated.
7
Population development within the narrow delineation is characterised by decline with some growth
around the city of Joensuu. The western parts of Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, however, show strong growth as a
result of natural increase. On the Russian side, the Republic of Karelia suffers from strong demographic
decline of over -20 per cent over the time period 2009 to 2010 in some raions.
The Republic of Karelia has also the lowest GDP per capita among all Green Belt regions and economic
development has been sluggish. On the Finnish side, Kainuu, Pohjois-Pohjanmaa and Pohjois-Karjala have
largely followed the national development trend in terms of GDP. There are three international border
crossing points, but still no regular passenger train connections.
The northernmost region is characterised by extremely sparse population and little infrastructure
endowment. However, the region also boasts some larger urban centres such as Murmansk and Rovaniemi
and is increasingly attracting geopolitical and geo-economic interest due to the oil and gas deposits, mining
opportunities as well as the potential opening of the northern sea route. Tourism also plays a relatively
strong role in the economy of Finnish Lapland. There are three international border crossing points (two on
the Finnish-Russian and one on the Norwegian-Russian border).
The Finnish and Norwegian parts of the narrow delineation are entirely void of larger urban centres. On the
Russian side, however, there are some larger mining communities. Finnish Lapland has experienced
moderate population decline within the narrow delineation. The Norwegian municipalities have shown
some growth, whereas Murmansk oblast has experienced strong demographic decline. Massive
outmigration is a particularly pronounced problem in Murmansk region and is a consequence of the relative
‘over-population’ of this peripheral area during the Soviet period. Murmansk oblast has also had the worst
economic development trend of all Russian Green Belt regions experiencing a substantial decline in the
output in such key economic branches as fishing, mining and quarrying, generation of electricity,
transportation, education and healthcare.
All northernmost regions rely heavily on the public sector. Many raions on the Russian side in both the
Karelian Republic and Murmansk oblast lack a solid economic base and fully relying on public-sector jobs in
such economic branches as healthcare, education, transport and public administration.
Biodiversity and connectivity of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia
The over 1000 km long area of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia is a cross-section of northern boreal forest.
It consists of various vegetation zones. Geology, soil and relief vary along it. In south the watersheds are
important. Valuable mires are situated in the middle of the area. The old growth forests become more
important northward from Kainuu (Finland). Oulanka-Paanajärvi region is a unique territory due to the very
high natural state of its forests. The Khibiny mountain complex in Murmansk is a tundra area surrounded by
the northern taiga. Khibiny Mountains and the Lovozero Mountains have the most representative
concentration of tundra species in the whole eastern Fennoscandia.
In the GBF area is unique also because here the features of the eastern and western species meet.
Internationally valuable species characteristic to the southern parts of the GBF area are Saimaa and Ladoga
ringed seal (Phoca hispida Saimensis and P. h. ladogensis). Species that are dependent on the rotten tree of
old-growth forests are major elements of the biodiversity of the GBF area.
The core of the GBF consists of the network of protected areas near the border of Finland, Russia and
Norway. Other high value nature areas supplement the PA network. The GBF is valuable for the provision of
many ecosystem services on local, regional and global scale.
8
Many ecological processes rely on connectivity of landscape. Therefore the connectivity promotes also the
provision potential of many ecosystem services. Green Belt of Fennoscandia has an important role in the
network of ecological corridors in the Fennoscandian peninsula as a main south-north ecological corridor
crossed by many east-west corridors. Habitat loss and fragmentation outside the existing protected areas
of the GBF are however major threats for ecological corridors and biodiversity because the species need to
move between protected areas in order to survive as climate warms and conditions change.
The high conservation value areas in the northwest Russia have been analysed in the Gap Analysis for the
protected area network in northwest Russia (2013). The Barents Protected Area Network –project analysed
the high conservation value areas in larger area which to some extent overlap with the GBF area. However,
the high conservation areas nor the connectivity of the whole GBF area has not been analysed.
Finnish Environment Institute (2014) made a preliminary study on spatial data and analysis methods for
assessing the ecosystem services and connectivity of the protected areas network of the GBF.
4. Concept and Vision of the GBF network
Vision of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia
The three countries have agreed upon the following for the development of the GBF:
The Green Belt of Fennoscandia is developed into a widely acknowledged
transboundary model area for biodiversity conservation, social well-being, and
environmentally sustainable economic growth generated by the region’s unique
biological and geological diversity and cultural heritage.
The concept of the GBF network
The Green Belt of Fennoscandia (GBF) is an ecological network producing valuable ecosystem services and
supporting adaptation to climate change. It is also a network of stakeholders in Finland, Russia and Norway
cooperating on developing the Green Belt of Fennoscandia.
The core of the GBF is formed by the network of existing and planned protected areas (PAs) of differing
status along the Finnish–Norwegian, Finnish–Russian and Norwegian–Russian borders, stretching from the
Gulf of Finland and the Karelian Isthmus to the Barents Sea. The PA network with surrounding areas ensure
both north–south and east–west ecological connections for habitats and species and support their
conservation and species migration. The development of the GBF is based on the biological and geological
diversity and rich cultural heritage of the region.
The GBF has physical and functional boundaries. The existing and planned protected areas belong to the
area inside the physical boundaries of the GBF , whereas the functional boundaries include the cooperation
network and especially the stakeholders benefiting from the PAs inside the physical boundaries.
9
Developments within the GBF concept are implemented through a cooperation network of national,
regional and local administrations, protected areas, scientific and educational institutions, the business
community and non-governmental organisations, with a special focus on participatory cross-border
processes.
Thereby, the GBF is a platform for comprehensive

trilateral cooperation in biodiversity conservation;

development of livelihoods and social well-being in the region, based on the region’s unique
biological and geological diversity and cultural heritage;

promotion of environmental sustainability in spatial planning and in coordination of development
processes in the area;

trilateral cooperation in research on biodiversity, climate change, culture and social well-being;

improvement of environmental awareness and increase in participation at all levels.
Through development of its identity and in the context of biodiversity conservation under the Convention
on Biological Diversity (CBD), the GBF provides a framework and platform for ecologically, economically,
socially and culturally sustainable transboundary cooperation and for developing bioeconomy3 and social
well-being in the border areas.
As a part of the European Green Belt, the GBF forms a mechanism for participation in wider European
cooperation on research, nature conservation, and economic and social development.
5. GBF Components and Targets
The implementation of the GBF strategy will be conducted under six components with the following goals
and key targets for year 2020:
Biodiversity conservation
Goal: Development of a network of protected areas and ecological connections within the three countries to
ensure conservation of biodiversity, as well as sufficient north–south and east–west connectivity for
migration
Target 1.1: A representative PA network is established.
Target 1.2: Ecological connectivity of the protected areas is enhanced through trilateral cooperation.
Target 1.3: PAs are managed so that the conservation status of habitats and species is maintained and/or
improved.
3
Bioeconomy refers to an economy that relies on renewable natural resources to produce food, energy, products and
services. The bioeconomy will reduce our dependence on fossil natural resources, prevent biodiversity loss and create
new economic growth and jobs in line with the principles of sustainable development.
10
Target 1.4: Key species, habitats and physical elements of the ecosystems within the GBF are defined,
surveyed with harmonised methods and data are made available.
Target 1.5: Cooperation in the management of transboundary species populations and habitats leads to
maintenance and/or improvement of their conservation status.
Research
Goal: Intensified trilateral research cooperation on biodiversity conservation, climate change, culture and
social well-being in the GBF
Target 2.1: Multidisciplinary and transboundary analysis of the shortage of scientific information is
conducted for the whole GBF area.
Target 2.2: Measures are established for monitoring the changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services
under the impact of climate change and other factors.
Target 2.3: The GBF provides a platform for active research cooperation and dissemination of GBF-related
research to the research community, decision-makers and general public.
Economic and regional development
Goal: Strengthened sustainable economic and regional development based on human capacity building and
ecosystem services in the GBF area
Target 3.1: The GBF approach is integrated into spatial and development planning in the whole GBF area.
Target 3.2: Bioeconomy and nature-based means of livelihood such as nature tourism, reindeer herding
especially as a part of the Sámi culture and other environmentally sustainable services and products are
developed and reconciled in the GBF area.
Social and cultural development
Goal: Strengthened livelihoods based on the natural values and cultural heritage of the GBF area
Target 4.1: Traditional knowledge and cultural heritage are identified and key cultural heritage sites are
secured.
Target 4.2: Active cross-border development of livelihoods based on the GBF is enhanced to secure social
well-being and lifelong connections over the border.
Target 4.3: In developing the GBF it will be adhered to the articels 8 (j) and 10 (c) of the Convention on the
Biological Diversity (CBD) concerning rights of the Sámi and other indigenous peoples in the GBF area.
Institutional development
Goal: Intensified cross-border cooperation within the GBF network
Target 5.1: The GBF is a well-organised cooperation network with sufficient resourcing ensured.
Target 5.2: The GBF is a well-known and influential part of the European Green Belt (EGB) network.
11
Target 5.3: Twin park cooperation is established for all relevant National Parks and other PAs in the GBF
area.
Target 5.4: Platforms are developed for active sharing of best practices and for cooperation with key
stakeholders.
Target 5.5: Good cross-border access and cooperation with border authorities.
Target 5.6: The GBF is acknowledged in relevant funding programmes as an eligible target for funding.
Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA)
Goal: High level of awareness of the GBF’s unique biological and geological diversity and their conservation
among all stakeholders
Target 6.1: The GBF brand is developed to support the GBF marketing and self-identity of local people.
Target 6.2: Environmental awareness is improved among the general public, authorities and businesses
operating in the GBF area.
Target 6.3: A plan for communication, education, participation and awareness (CEPA Plan) for the GBF is
prepared, implemented and monitored with good coordination.
12
6. Institutional Framework
As an international cooperation process the GBF coordination is made both on national and trilateral level.
The final decision making occurs on the national level. The Memorandum of Understanding for the
development of the GBF does not create any legally binding obligations to participating countries.
The institutional framework for the development of the GBF consists of coordinative and implementing
actors at four levels:
National coordination
Coordination in each country is conducted by national working groups who are the key actors to ensure a
well-coordinated approach in each country. The serve also as a decision making as appropriate. The
national working groups include the key national agencies as well as representation of the
regions/provinces.
Trilateral coordination
A Steering Committee of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia is the strategic coordination body, represented
by the responsible ministries of the three countries. It is responsible of overall follow up of the Green Belt
activities and general communication policy. It has a rotating chairmanship and meets 1-2 times per year.
National decisions guide the work of the Steering Committee.
Practical trilateral coordination is conducted by the Trilateral Working Group (TWG), represented by key
sector institutions of each country. This working group will meet frequently to advance joint work on the
GBF as well as monitor and coordinate the activities. Thematic task force groups may be established as
appropriate.
The work will be coordinated with the processes of key bilateral bodies, i.e. the Finnish-Russian Working
Group on Nature Protection under the Joint Finnish-Russian Environmental Commission, the Joint
Norwegian-Russian Environmental Commission, created under the above-mentioned Agreements, and the
Barents Euro-Arctic Council's Working Group on Environment, in particular its Nature Protection Subgroup.
7. Implementation arrangements
The development of the GBF is implemented through two key approaches:
Institutional cooperation
Institutional cooperation between sector agencies and institutions (environmental and forestry
administrations, managements of protection areas, research institutions, NGOs, etc.) will be conducted to
advance biodiversity protection, facilitate environmentally sustainable land-use planning, strengthen
mutual networking as well as for decreasing cooperation constraints such as restrictions on cross-border
access.
The institutional cooperation will be conducted mainly through existing cooperation mechanisms and with
core funding of the participating institutions.
Projects and programs
13
However, as many of the developments require external funding, a portfolio of projects will be built for
advancing the GBF. Projects may be trilateral, bilateral, national or sub-regional/local and cover all areas of
the strategy, e.g. biodiversity protection and research, socio-cultural development, livelihood development,
and education and awareness raising.
Projects are dependent on the availability of external funding whereby the coordinating bodies need to
ensure that development of GBF is an eligible theme in relevant funding programs and instruments.
Potential funding instruments include various EU programs such as the European Neighbourhood
Instrument ENI 2014-2020, Horizon 2020, Life+, European Regional Develepment Fund ERDF, European
European Agriculture Fund for Rural Development EAFRD and Interreg programmes, funding of the Nordic
Council of Ministers, Norwegian Barents Secretariat, Global Environment Facility as well as various other
funding instruments.
Through the coordination structures, GBF strategy aims at active networking between different
implementing agencies for development of well-coordinated projects with sufficient critical mass to create
real impact.
8. Monitoring and Evaluation
The implementation of the GBF strategy will be subject to systematic monitoring, based on the targets,
indicators and related milestones for 2020 defined in the Logical Framework developed for the strategy.
The Logical Framework is presented as an Annex to this strategy.
Monitoring will be conducted through the following mechanism:



A simple reporting template will be developed, and disseminated for all projects and processes
implemented under the GBF framework.
Each project/process under the GBF umbrella will report annually to the designated coordinating
body in the country of the project’s lead partner.
The coordinating bodies will compile the data into combined progress reports which will be
reviewed by the Trilateral Working Group. Based on the findings, the Trilateral Working Group will
propose actions for relevant stakeholders.
The implementation of the strategy will be subject to an independent evaluation in early 2020. The
Trilateral Working Group will commence the evaluation. The findings and recommendations of the
evaluation will be reviewed by the coordinating bodies at all levels, and presented to the Steering
Committee. Based on the decision made on the national level, the strategy may then be updated.
14
ANNEX A. SWOT Analysis for the Green Belt of Fennoscandia (GBF Trilateral WG, 10th October 2013)
Strengths
Weaknesses
Strong network, good connections and links: Over 20 years of experience with an already
existing network for international cooperation, joint projects and building relations, with a
broad group of participants. Organizations in the region maintain friendly and twinning
connections; cultural links across the region are long standing. North Karelia Biosphere Reserve
in Finland is an example of a sustainable development model in the GBF area which combines a
regional network of sustainability projects, interdisciplinary research and extensive localoriented cooperation.
Broad and complex concept: The GBF is a broad and abstract concept which is often use
discussions, but which simultaneously excludes local people and authorities. Not all rele
stakeholders are aware of the 20 years’ work in the GBF. The joining of ecological and econo
perspectives is difficult.
GBF area: The GBF is a large, continuous, diverse and international area with undisturbed
natural complexes (ecosystems) found in combination with valuable historical and cultural Lack of local awareness: The GBF is not widely known among local people. They also have a
heritage. It is situated in the “centre” of Europe and connects two large regions (Baltic and understanding of its values.
Arctic).
Differences in political decision-making and legislation: The three countries have many differe
Industrial and municipal impacts on the natural environment are low: The natural environment in in their legislation and regulations concerning protected areas. The borders between Russia
the GBF benefits from the low population density and minimal industrial impacts in the area.
Finland and Russia and Norway are “strict” (e.g. laws, customs regulations, quotas,), w
obstructs the movement of wildlife, people and goods.
Concept of the GBF: The GBF is a broad-based, topical and ecological concept promoting
Lack of a common understanding and vision: There is no clear understanding of the GBF bounda
sustainable development and conservation of biodiversity. It fits well into discussions on the
and vision. The GBF nature conservation programme is also lacking.
bioeconomy and climate change. Its strong scientific base is an advantage.
Stakeholders and competing priorities between them: Because of the extent of the area, there
a great number of all kinds of government and administrative bodies working in the GBF. No
Values of the GBF area: The GBF area has large undisturbed natural complexes (ecosystems)
relevant parties are, however, taking part in the cooperation. Border guards, for example,
found in combination with existing valuable historical and cultural heritage.
important for the development of the GBF because of some problems in the border area. Con
have arisen between the main stakeholders of the GBF and local people.
Demography, socio-economics and infrastructure: The low population density results in
Knowledge base: Vast scientific knowledge of and databases on the natural environment and economic development. Infrastructure and human resources are not are not sufficiently prep
major natural resources are available for the protected areas in the GBF.
to fulfil’ GBF-related tasks. There is a lack of qualified staff especially in remote protected area
from cities. Nature-based tourism destinations in Russia are of low appeal to investors.
15
Interest: The GBF area generates constant interest among potential investors.
Opportunities
Threats
Visionary prospects: An opportunity exists for establishing an actual operating model for
Conceptual development: Too tight prerequisites for developing the GBF concept may po
sustainable use of natural areas in the GBF and a platform for developing traditional and
threat to its existence. On the other hand, it has been unclear how to integrate econo
innovative economic activities, and for generating conditions that enhance traditional uses of
development into the GBF area to the GBF concept. The subject for the concept is not clear.
nature, nature-based tourism and recreation in natural areas.
Rapid processes in society and natural areas: The GBF area might be degraded before the pro
Changes in attitudes: Natural values are recognized as having high importance in society.
reaches the point of concrete actions. Rapid processes in society and natural areas may ma
impossible to turn the concept into reality.
Lack of support and will in society: The further development of the GBF concept is threatened
Long history: An opportunity is at hand to sum up the experiences of the GBF veterans through
failure in communications, lack of will and avoidance of responsibility in such difficult matter
interviews.
protection of natural areas.
Forest management: Logging in state-owned forests with natural values poses a threat to
Economic crisis gives an opportunity for change: During the economic crisis actions are needed
biodiversity in the GBF. At the landscape level there is a lack of integration between na
for solving certain problems. These also could be planned in a sustainable way.
conservation and forestry management.
EU funding: Many kinds of financing instruments are available which could be used in financing
Poor demography
the development of the GBF.
Failure to organise and finance the development process: Financing the implementation of
Extending the networks and cooperation even further:
BPAN (Barents Protected Area
concept is critical for the future of the GBF. Lack of financial instruments to implement it pos
Network) also connects Sweden to the process. The European Green Belt provides a connection
risk to the whole GBF. If the implementation takes much time and constant updates are nee
to Europe. By including Border Guards in the process and taking advantage of their interest,
there is also a risk that the concept will grow obsolete. Focusing on procedures (working gro
new connections and opportunities could open up. Even public-private partnerships could be
among others) might happen at the expense of substance and operative actions. The GBF
developed under the GBF umbrella. Another possibility is the pooling of knowledge and
whole could be misinterpreted if the focus is on protecting individual areas instead of looking
networking of a great number of specialists who have a high creativity potential.
in its entirety.
Technology and restoration: New technologies for sustainable use of biodiversity could be Economic decline: The economic decline in the EU and individual regions of the GBF poses a th
developed and introduced. Restoration could also be seen as an opportunity.
to its development.
Forest management practices: Managing forests in accordance with the principles of
sustainable development could lead to new practices. Forest management could be integrated
Existing networks: Some overlap occurs between different kinds of already existing proce
with nature conservation and the connectivity of natural areas could be developed through
(BEAC, BPAN, European Green Belt).
alternative management schemes. An opportunity exists to protect the state-owned forests
with natural values.
Spillover benefits: As remote villages become uninhabited, nature benefits.
There are considerable limitations (resource-related, legislative, etc.) of varying type and scope
16
Other tools: Other kinds of tools are also available which support the conservation of
Administrative constraints: Deficient legislation, discord between laws, unstable governments
biodiversity. In Finland, the voluntary “METSO” conservation programme for privately owned
administrative systems, and border legislation have been recognised as administrative constra
land could also be applied in the GBF area. In addition to these new tools, users of natural areas
posing risks to the development of the GBF.
are prepared to adopt the ethical stewardship of nature.
Industries that pose a threat to biodiversity: Land use changes because of the mining industry
example, pose a threat to the biodiversity of the GBF.
ANNEX B: LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE GREEN BELT OF FENNOSCANDIA
Vision: The Green Belt of Fennoscandia is developed into a widely acknowledged transboundary model area for biodiversity conservation,
social well-being, and environmentally sustainable economic growth generated by the region’s unique biological and geological diversity and
cultural heritage.
Objectives
Indicators
Milestones to 2020
Component 1: Biodiversity protection
Goal: Development of a network of protected areas and ecological connections within the three countries to ensure conservation of biodiversity, as
well as sufficient north–south and east–west connectivity for migration
Target 1.1:
A representative PA network is established
Percentage of planned PAs
established
All planned PAs have been officially established by 2020.
Target 1.2:
Coverage of critical ecological
Ecological connectivity of the protected areas is corridors with management
guidelines
strengthened
Critical ecological connections are identified and management
guidelines prepared for them.
Target 1.3:
Percentage of PAs with
PAs are managed so that the conservation status of approved and updated
management plans
habitats and species is maintained and/or improved
Risk assessment is done for all PA’s and management plans
prepared based on them.
Target 1.4:
Key species, habitats and physical elements of the
ecosystems within the GBF are defined, surveyed with
The concept for mapping developed, key species recognised
and mapped.
Status of mapping in each
country
17
Objectives
harmonised methods and data are made available
Indicators
Milestones to 2020
Target 1.5:
Cooperation in the management of transboundary
species populations and habitats leads to
maintenance and/or improvement of their
conservation status
Number of cooperative actions
concerning key species and
habitats
New cooperative actions launched for management of
transboundary species population.
Component 2: Research
Goal: Intensified trilateral research cooperation on biodiversity conservation, climate change, culture and social well-being in the GBf
Target 2.1:
Multidisciplinary and transboundary analysis of the
shortage of scientific information is conducted for the
whole GBF area
Coverage of the GAP Analysis
A generic GAP Analysis has been conducted over the whole
region.
Target 2.2:
Measures are established for joint monitoring of the
changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services under
the impact of climate change and other factors
Status of the monitoring system
A monitoring program is established and operating.
Target 2.3:
The GBF provides a platform for active research
cooperation and dissemination of GBF-related
research to the research community, decision-makers
and general public
Number of research programs
implemented/on-going
Several new GBF designated cross-border research projects
have been initiated.
A new joint GBF research programme has been launched.
Component 3: Economic and regional development
Goal: Strengthened sustainable economic and regional development based on human capacity building and ecosystem services in the GBF area
Target 3.1:
Percentage of spatial and
All regional spatial plans include GBF’s protected areas and
18
Objectives
Indicators
The GBF approach is integrated into spatial and development plans
development planning in the whole GBF area
acknowledging GBF
Milestones to 2020
address their connectivity.
Target 3.2:
Number of new products and
GBF-based nature tourism and other environmentally services applying GBF brand
sustainable services and products are developed
Several new products and services apply the GBF brand.
Component 4: Social and cultural development
Goal: Strengthened livelihoods based on the nature values and cultural heritage of the GBF area
Target 4.1:
Percentage of GBF-area with
Traditional knowledge and cultural heritage are cultural specifics and sites
mapped and data made
identified and key cultural heritage sites are secured
available
Target 4.2:
Active cross-border development of livelihoods based
on the GBF is enhanced to secure social well-being
and lifelong connections over the border
Number of GBF related crossborder livelihood and
community development
projects and their beneficiaries
Key sites mapped and data have been made available.
Several new projects have been launched.
Component 5: Institutional development
Goal: Intensified cross-border cooperation within the GBF network
Target 5.1:
GBF is a well-organized cooperation network with
sufficient resourcing ensured
Functionality of the planned
organization
The cooperation mechanisms are well established and the longterm funding for core coordination is ensured.
Trilateral GBF conference is organized regularly.
Target 5.2:
Status of GBF within the EGB
The GBF is a well-known and influential part of the
European Green Belt (EGB) network
Institutional arrangements have been made and the GBF
participates actively within the EGB.
19
Objectives
Indicators
Milestones to 2020
Target 5.3: Twin park cooperation is established for Number of twin park
National Parks and other relevant PAs in the GBF area cooperation agreements
Twin park cooperation is strengthened to cover all relevant
National Parks and the PA network.
Target 5.4:
Number and topics of platforms
Platforms are developed for active sharing of best and stakeholders involved
practices and for cooperation with key stakeholders
Key development areas are covered by platforms.
Target 5.5:
Decrease of access constraints
Good cross-border access and cooperation with
border authorities
Pilots for easier access have been implemented.
Target 5.6:
Percentage of relevant funding
The GBF is acknowledged in relevant funding instruments enabling GBFprojects
programmes as an eligible target for funding
GBF is recognized in all relevant funding instruments.
Component 6: Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA)
Goal: High level of awareness of the GBF’s unique biological and geological diversity and their conservation among all stakeholders
Target 6.1:
Visibility of the brand
The GBF brand is developed to support the GBF
marketing and self-identity of local people
Brand has been developed
Several services/products are using the brand.
Target 6.2:
Number of awareness raising
Environmental awareness is improved among the actions targeted for population
general public, authorities and businesses operating and businesses
in the GBF area
Several awareness raising actions and projects have been
launched.
Target 6.3:
Level of implementation of the
A plan for communication, education, participation CEPA plan
and awareness (CEPA Plan) for the GBF is prepared,
CEPA Plan is implemented.
20
Objectives
implemented and monitored with good coordination
Indicators
Milestones to 2020
ANNEX C: Participants of the Future of the GBF –workshops (preparatory strategy workshops)
Inari, 15.-16.5.2014
Paul Eric
Pertti
Tiia
Venla
Vesa
Päivi
Tarja
Bjorn Arne
Anni-Helena
Riina
Marina
Heli
Aspholm
Itkonen
Kalske
Karkola
Luhta
Lundvall
Manninen
Naess
Ruotsala
Tervo
Trusova
Viiri
Bioforsk
Metsähallitus
Office of the Finnmark County Governor
Golden Geopark of Lapland -project, Inari Municipal Business and Development
Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto ry
Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment for Lapland
Inari-Saariselkä Tourism Ltd
Norwegian Environment Agency
Saami Parliament
Metsähallitus, Natural Heritage Services of Lapland
Pasvik State Nature Reserve, Russia
Finnish Forest Centre
Lappeenranta, 19.5.2014
Tuula
Jukka
Frank
Arto
Eeva
Anssi
Dahlman
Halonen
Hering
Hämäläinen
Jernström
Kemppinen
MTK-Kaakkois-Suomi
Metsäteollisuus ry
Kymenlaakson liitto
Etelä-Karjalan liitto
Lappeenrannan University of Technology
Uutisvuoksi
21
Toomas
Heli
Kirsi
Sanna
Aune
Tuula
Mikko
Lybeck
Ojala
Pohjankoski
Poutamo
Ritola-Grahn
Tanska
Tiira
Cursor Oy
Kotkan kaupunki/ympäristökeskus
Kehittämisyhdistys Sepra ry
Etelä-Savon maakuntaliitto
Parikkalan kunta
Kaakkois-Suomen ELY-keskus
Metsähallitus/luontopalvelut
Joensuu, 2.6.2014
Sari
Darja
Matti
Matti
Teemu
Kerttu
Jyrki
Tuomas
Marja
Henna
Jukka
Eugene
Hannu
Tiina
Liisa
Eero
Vilho
Janna
Vesa
Asko
Maarit
Alatossava
Flogny
Fritsch
Hovi
Huikuri
Härkönen
Haataja
Kallio
Kolström
Konu
Korhonen
Lopatin
Luotonen
Moisala
Mononen
Oura
Pasanen
Puumalainen
Rantanen
Saarelainen
Vainio
Metsähallitus, Pohjanmaan luontopalvelut
Metsähallitus
Itä-Suomen yliopisto
Metsähallitus, Pohjanmaan luontopalvelut
Pohjois-Karjalan maakuntaliitto
Metsähallitus
Suomen metsäkeskus, julkiset palvelut, Kainuu
Pohjois-Pohjanmaan liitto
Itä-Suomen yliopisto
Itä-Suomen yliopisto
Suomussalmen kunta
Itä Suomen Yliopisto
Pohjois-Karjalan ELY-keskus
Pohjois-Karjalan maakuntaliitto
P-K Biosfäärialue ohjausryhmä
Joensuun Latu
MTK - Pohjois-Karjala
Joensuun kaupunki
Kuhmon kaupunki
Lieksan kaupunki/kansalaisopisto
Kainuun ELY-keskus
22
Petrozavodsk, 3.6.2014
Anastasia V.
Alexander N.
Alexander M.
Oleg L.
Nadezhda V.
Juri V.
Alexander F.
Olga N.
Aleksei V.
Vladimir V.
Ivan V.
Denis J.
Sergei V.
Sergei A.
Boris J.
Tamara A.
Nikolai N.
Elena V.
Dmitri V.
Mikko
Tapio
Jevgeni
Paul
Vasileva
Gromtsev
Kryshen
Kuznetsov
Mikhailova
Savelev
Titov
Bahmet
Kravchenko
Belkin
Kipruhin
Maksimov
Tarkhov
Pozdnyakov
Loskutov
Putrolajnen
Bigun
Karhu
Bazegski
Tiira
Lindholm
Jakovlev
Silfverberg
23