WIXLIB

the past year. The size of catch byrecreational fishermen in Finland was 48million kg in 1998 and 79 million kg inSweden in 1995. In Sweden, the net valueof recreational fishing has been estimatedat almost 79.5 million EUR, exceeding thevalue of commercial fishing. (Sievänen andNeuvonen 2010, Statistics Sweden 2012band 2012c, Statistics Norway 2012,Toivonen et al. 2000, Garpe 2008).Table 1: Socio-economic importance and value of marine fishing in the Nordic countriesNumber ofprofessionalfishermen(incl. ,500 2,195200420052 heries 2012/StatisticIceland 2012RKTL20122,288,6231,066,428Havs ochvattenmyndigheten2012159,968132,979.2 milISK( 837 mil1EUR)201015,883.6 milNOK ( 2,1051mil EUR)3,435.5 milDKK( 462 mil1EUR)2010970.8 mil SEK1( 110 mil EUR)26.5mil EUR20112010StatisticsIceland 2012StatisticsNorway2012The DanishDirectorateof Fisheries2011StatisticsSweden 2012b,2012cRKTL2012Size of catch(tonnes)Value of thecatch (mil ofnat. currency)225,413ReferenceyearSource20051Not availableStatisticsGreenland20122011122,078Based on based on exchange rate in 2012Reindeer herdingAlthough the worldwide commercialproduction of reindeer meat is relativelysmall it is still a very significant source ofincome in Finland, Norway and Sweden. Innorth Finland, Norway and Sweden, i.e.Nordic areas where reindeer herdingremains a common source of livelihood,approximately 6,500 Sami people work asreindeer herders (Table 2 below). Reindeerhusbandry continues to be a greatimportance in the Sami region because theshipping, trading and processing of itsproducts provide numerous jobs. Althoughthe main business related to reindeerherding is meat production, reindeerherding is supported by policy action alsobecause of its cultural importance, whichgoes beyond being merely a source ofincome. As a supplement to their income,reindeer herders also engage with severalother sources of livelihood such as hunting,production of decorative items and tourism.Degrading of pastures due to overgrazing isone of the biggest challenges for reindeerherding in the future. In addition,competing land use with forestry andnatural predators might affect numbers.6

Table 2: Socio-economic importance of reindeer herding in Finland, Sweden and NorwaySource: Jernsletten and Klokov (2002)CountryHerdersReindeers(No)Finland5,600 Samiand non-Sami186,000Sweden3,500 Sami;1000 nonSami2,936 SamiNorway12Size 2160,000(34%)57 reindeerherdingcooperatives51 SamivillagesValue of production1(mil EUR)200420052006 10 1013Yes 5 57165,0002140,000(40%)80 reindeerherdingdistrictsYes 10 10 10Based on 2.5 – 2.8 (FI), 1.5 – 2.0 (SE) and 2.0 – 2.3 (NO) million kg / year production of meat in 2004-2006Data from 2000 in Finland, from 1998 in Sweden and 2001 in NorwayNon-timber forest products: berries andgameWhile there are no on-going annualstatistics on the amounts of berries andmushrooms picked and/or marketed acrossthe Nordic countries, a number ofindividual studies from Finland and Swedenprovide some estimates (Table 3 below). Ingeneral, the Nordic forests produce severaltonnes of wild berries annually with only asmall fraction of them being used, most atthe household level. The socio-economicimportance of hunting in the Nordiccountries is a combination of revenueproviding activity, household subsistencevalue, and cultural and recreationalsignificance.Table 3: Quantities and values of berries and mushrooms picked for markets in 2005 inFinland, Norway and Sweden. Source: Turtiainen and Nuutinen onnes / year)12,02713,790350Value (mil EUR)211.862132.4350.5241MushroomsQuantity(tonnes / year)426Not available500Value (mil EUR)21.019Not available1.873Value for mushrooms and berries togetherBased on the source, the estimated values for NO and FI are based on collector's price whereas in Swedishthe value is based on " weather conditions and newspaper information".27

Around one million Nordic people go huntingevery year – almost 5% of the total Nordicpopulatin. Estimates for the value of gamemeat were obtained from Finland, Swedenand Norway ranging between 44 – 125million EUR (Table 4 below). In terms of thenational economy, game plays the mostsignificant role in Greenland where huntingand whaling remain an important parts ofpeople’s livelihoods. In particular, hunting isof high socio-economic importance to localcommunities in terms of cultural identity andit also remains an important means ofsupplying households with preferred meat.Table 4: Socio-economic significance of hunting in the Nordic 171,119Iceland12,227Greenland6,539Eurasian elk68,423179Eurasian elk80,974181Eurasian elk36,4003Roe ,400Woodpigeon232,100Black grouse170,000Roe deer119,000Mallard 91,500Wood n299,500Ref. yearSource2010RKTL 20122007-2008Naturvårdverket2012,StatisticsSweden 2009Willowgrouse127,850Woodpigeon56,900Red sonet al. 2010,StatisticsIceland 2012Reindeer15,092Polarbear124Guillemot84,412Harp seal84,223Ringed seal71,260Value ofgame meatRef. yearSource83 mil EUR1,119 mil SEK( 125 mil EUR)2005-2006Mattsson et al.200844 mil EURNA2010RKTL 20122001Lunnan et Greenland2012NA

Regulating services: climate regulation,water purification and pollination18 million EUR and that of wild berries(bilberries and lingonberries) would bearound 3.9 million EUR (Lehtonen 2012).In addition to pollination of commercialcrops, there are numerous home gardensin Nordic countries. An estimated value ofpollination (by honeybees) in homegardens was 39 million EUR in Finland(Yläoutinen 1994, cited in Lehtonen 2012).In Denmark the value of the general insectpollination service was calculated to beworth 421 to 690 million DKK ( 56.6 to 92.8 million EUR) a year (Axelsen et al.2011). In Sweden the value of honeybeepollination service was calculated to be189-325 million SEK ( 21.5- 37 millionEUR) (Rahbek Pedersen 2009a). Whenconsidering these values it must be notedthat insect pollination of greenhousecrops is often provided by commercialpollinators.While more research on status of andtrends in Nordic carbon storage andsequestration is required, some estimatesalready exist for the monetary value ofcarbon sequestration and storage. InFinland Matero et al (2007) estimated thevalue of carbon sequestration of Finnishforest trees to be 1 876 million EUR, andthe value of change in mineral soil carbonstock to be 136 million EUR. In SwedenGren and Svensson (2004) calculated theannual carbon sequestering value ofSwedish forest to be between 29-46billion SEK (2001 SEK) ( 3.3 – 5.2 billionEUR)basedontheestimatedconsumption value of 11-18 billion SEK( 1.2 – 2 billion EUR) and investmentvalue of 18-28 billion SEK ( 2 – 3.2 billionEUR) (See the main report for furtherdetails).While estimates are available for theglobal economic importance and value ofpollination, no such overall estimates yetexist for the Nordic countries. A recentstudy from Finland, however, assessedthat the value of honeybee pollinationservice of selected crops would be aroundFinally, in the Nordic countries manystudies have been carried out to revealthe public appreciation of cleaner surfacewaters. A summary of these is provided inTable below. In general, these studies canbe used as proxy indicators for the valueof water purification for the general public(i.e. water purification as a public good).These studies are mainly based onwillingness to pay (WTP) studies and donot, therefore, reflect market values orreal economic gains.9

Table 5: Examples of the estimated values for ecosystem’s ability to improve water quality (publicgood)ReferencesStudy areaMethodAppelblad,2001Sweden, River ByskeWTP for a day fishinglicense in the River ByskeSandstöm,1996Sweden, Laholm Bayand entire SwedishcoastRecreation benefits fromhypothetical 50% reductionof the nutrient loadSoutukorva,2001Sweden, Stockholmarchipelago,Stockholm andUppsalaSöderqvistet al, 2000Sweden, Stockholmarchipelago,Stockholm andUppsalaKosenius, AK, 2010Finland, Gulf ofFinlandRecreational benefits froma hypothetical 1-metreimprovement in waterclarity, 30% reduction ofthe nutrient concentrationsWTP (higher prices of tapwater and agriculturalproducts) for 1-metreimprovement in waterclarityWTP for three nutrientreduction scenarios ofdifferent intensities in theGulf of FinlandAtkins andBurdon2006Denmark, RandersFjord in ArhusCountyWTP for hypotheticalimprovement to obtaingood water quality in thefjord12.02 EUR / month / person over 10years, totalling 5.5 million EUR a monthover 10 yearsEggert andOlsson 2002Sweden, south-westSwedish coastWTP for preferred waterquality improvements (forbiodiversity bathing andfishing)Vesterinenet al. 2010Finland, inland andcoastal watersRecreational benefits froma hypothetical 1-metrereduction/improvement inwater clarityMean average WTP from 1,400 SEK (2002SEK) ( 159 EUR) / person for avoidingreduction in biodiversity to 600 SEK(2002 SEK) ( 68 EUR) / person forimproving biodiversity levels.Extrapolating the results over the wholeSwedish population leads to anaggregate estimate of 400 - 700 millionSEK ( 45.6 – 80 million EUR) for eitherimproving the cod stock or avoidingdeterioration of marine biodiversity.Swimming benefits loss underimpoverished environmental conditions:31-92 million EUR / year; fishing benefitsloss: 38 - 113 million EUR / year.Swimmers consumer surplus underimproved environmental conditions: 29–87 million EUR / year; fishers consumersurplus 43 - 129 million EUR / year.10Estimated impact on recreationalservicesWTP under unimproved environmentalconditions: 89 SEK ( 10 EUR); WTP underimproved conditions: 142 SEK ( 16 EUR);Consumer surplus: SEK 18 ( 2 EUR) / dayin 1996Consumer surplus: 12 - 32 million SEK( 1.3 – 3.6 million EUR) / year for theonly Laholm Bay;Consumer surplus: 240 - 540 million SEK( 27.3 – 61.6 million EUR) / year for theentire Swedish coastConsumer surplus 59 - 93 million SEK( 6.7 – 10.6 million EUR) in 1998 and70- 110 million SEK ( 8 – 12.5 millionEUR) in 1999.500 - 850 million SEK ( 57 – 97 millionEUR) / year in 199928,475 – 53,884 million EUR (total)

Recreation and tourismoutdoor life would result in 75,637 jobopportunities (Fredman et al. 2010).Nature tourism, i.e. overnight trips withactivities related to nature, is considered tobe one of the fastest growing sectors ofinternational tourism. For example inLapland, Finland nature tourism is alreadythe most important sector contributing theregional economy (Tyrväinen, 2006, citedin Bell 2007). No statistics specificallyrelated to nature tourism are available forthe Nordic counties. However, given therole nature plays in attracting tourism tothe Nordic countries, general informationon tourism can be used to indicate thesocio-economic role of nature insupporting tourism. Yearly some 100million nights are spent in different touristaccommodation establishments in Nordiccountries by domestic or foreign tourists.In addition, nature is mentioned mostoften as a main attraction of holidayhouses and there are perhaps more holidayhomes per capita in Nordic countries thananywhere else in the world (1.5 million intotal) (Müller 2007). Approximately 50% ofNordic people have access to holiday houseand in Finland the figure is over 60%(Sievänen and Neuvonen 2010). Foreigners(including Nordic visitors to other Nordiccountries) spend some 15 million nights atholiday houses.Recreation activities in nature, i.e. outdoorrecreation related to everyday life thatpeople do near their home, are extremelypopular in Nordic countries. For example,an average adult Finn does some kind ofoutdoor activity on average 170 times ayear (i.e. around three times a week, with1/3 of people doing such activity daily)(Sievänen and Neuvonen 2010). In Sweden,36-56% of people reportedly use forests forwalking at least 20 times a year (Romild etal. 2011). In Norway, hiking in forests ormountains is practised more than twice amonth by almost half of the population (i.e.around 2.4 million people) (StatisticsNorway 2012). Finally, in Denmarkapproximately 70% of Danes visited greenareas several times a week, with parks andother open natural areas being the mostpopular green areas, followed by beaches(Schipperijn et al. 2010). Outdoor life canhave significant impacts on regional andnational economies. In Sweden, the valueadded from outdoor life expenditure wascalculated to be 34,331 million SEK ( 3,918million EUR) and altogether spending onBioeconomy and bio-innovationsThere is increasing interest from Nordicand Arctic countries in researchingbiotechnological application based onNordic and Arctic genetic resources.Norway has the most developed andpromising marine biotechnology sectorfocused on Arctic genetic resources.pharmaceutical industry, e.g. cardiotoniccompounds from lily of the valley(Convallaria majalis L.) and foxglove(Digitalis purpurea L.) and enduranceincreasing compounds from roseroot(Rhodiola rosea L.) (Fabricant andFarnsworth 2001) (Box 1 below).Altogether 134 Nordic plant species havebeen identified that have medicinal oraromatic properties and that are ofFurthermore, a number of Nordic plantcompounds are currently used by the11

current socio-economic interest and thatgrow wild in the Nordic and Baltic region(Asdal et al. 2006). Recent examples ofscientific screening of Nordic plantsinclude sage species tested for their effecton type-2-diabetes in Denmark andCorydalis species on Alzheimer’s disease(Christensen 2009, Adsersen et al. 2006).Box 1: examples of Nordic bioeconomy and bio-innovationsBioremediation and removal of undesired substance: The organic waste produced by papermills is also a potential resource. Following this principle, methods to use paper mills’ wastein protein biomass production have been developed. The pekilo process, for instance, hasbeen developed in Finland for the production of single-cell feed using the fungi Paecilomycesvariotii. The first commercial pekilo plant, built at the United Paper Mills pulp plant atJämsänkoski, Finland, had an annual capacity of 10 000 tonnes of single-cell protein.Similarly, the fungi Torula utilis is used by the Boise-Cascade Corp. as a high protein foodextender and animal feed. An industrial ethanol plant connected to a sulfite pulp mill is inoperation at Örnsköldsvik in Sweden (Scheper et al. 2007).Pharmaceutical and medical uses: The Armi Project co-ordinated by the Finnish ForestResearch Institute (Metla) ran from 2001 to 2004 and isolated some 600 strains of microbesfrom boreal and Arctic environments in soil sediment, stream water, snow, lichen and mossfrom Lapland in Northern Arctic Finland and Svalbard in the Norwegian Arctic. A Europeanpharmaceuticals company has subsequently bought the rights to start screening thecollection of bacterial strains collected as part of the Armi research for anti-cancer drugcandidates. In Norway, a total of 180 million NOK ( 23.8 million EUR) has been committed tothe MabCent initiative by the Norwegian Research Council, the University of Tromsø and theassociated biotechnology companies. Approximately 25% of this funding has been providedby the commercial partners. (Leary 2008)Nordic medicinal plants: One of the most interesting medicinal plants in the world isroseroot, Rhodiola rosea L., (which grows wild in Nordic mountainous areas and is rare intemperate regions). Roseroot is said to be the northern ginseng and there are severalroseroot products on the markets. In traditional medicine roseroot has been used forphysical endurance, resistance to altitude sickness and in treatment of fatigue anddepression. Worldwide there is high demand for roseroot, especially in the U.S, and thedemand is calculated to be approximately 20-30 tonnes / year. Due to high demand wildroseroot has become seriously threatened species in Russia and in central Europe. There isno current threat to wild roseroot populations in Nordic countries and also successfulcultivation trials of roseroot have been made in Nordic countries. (Asdal et al. 2006,Economo and Galambosi 2003)Blue mussel farming to improve water quality: In Sweden, several initiatives and pilotprojects are underway to use Blue mussel farming to improve water quality. In LysekilMunicipality, a payment mechanism has been set up whereby the polluter (the local wastewater plant) pays mussel farmers to remove nutrients from the coastal waters. Payments12

are based on the content of nitrogen and phosphorous in the harvested mussels. Projectresults show that 3,500 tonnes of blue mussels/year help to remove 100% of the nitrogenemissions of the Lysekil waste water treatment plant. The use of mussels to clean thenitrogen content of the waste water plant saves the municipality close to 100,000 EUR/yearcompared to using a traditional technique (Zandersen et al. 2009).Conclusions and recommendationsDespite the significant gaps in the existingknowledge base, it is evident that a rangeof ecosystem services are of high socioeconomic significance for the Nordiccountries, either based on their marketvalue or estimated value for the broaderpublic. Natural capital (biodiversity,ecosystems and related services) alsounderpin socio-economic well-being in theNordic countries. On the other hand, basedon the existing evidence based it is alsoclear that several of these ecosystemservices including, for example, marinefisheries,waterpurificationandpollination, have been seriously degradedand several others, such as carbon storage,are facing serious risks. In addition, ratheralarmingly the information available doesnot yet allow any conclusions to be drawnon the status of and trends in the majorityof services, including processes andfunctions supporting their maintenance.are needed to address the situation. Nordiccountries are already well on their waytowards a transition to a green economy.While the approaches taken towards“greening” the economy (or economies)are likely to differ between countries, theresults presented in this report clearlyindicate that future developments shouldbe based on a sound appreciation of thevalue and role of nature in underpinningsustainable socio-economic development.The outcomes of TEEB Nordic emphasisethat the first step towards integrating thevalue of ecosystem services into Nordicpolicies and decision-making processeswould be to identify and develop acommon set of indicators to assess andmonitor the status, trends and socioeconomic v

the Nordic synthesis. Based on the existing information available, the TEEB Nordic identified the range of ecosystem services maintained by healthy, well-functioning ecosystems and synthesised existing information on the present status, trends and socio-economic importance of these services. Finally, the study explored key