Type
 

dataset

1684 record(s)
 
Type of resources
Available actions
Topics
Keywords
Contact for the resource
Provided by
Years
Formats
Representation types
Update frequencies
status
Service types
Scale
Resolution
From 1 - 10 / 1684
  • FIN Aineiston tarkoituksena on: -Identifioida tie- ja rata-alueet, joiden varrella esiintyy uhanalaisia ja silmälläpidettäviä lajeja -Identifioida tie- ja rata-alueet, joiden varrella esiintyy hyviä elinvoimaisia niittyindikaattorilajeja (hyönteisten mesi- ja ravintokasveja) -Identifioida tie- ja rata-alueet, joiden varrella esiintyy suojelualueita -Identifioida tie- ja rata-alueet, joiden varrella esiintyy komealupiinia tai kurtturuusua -Identifioida tie- ja rata-alueet, joiden varrella esiintyy komealupiinia tai kurtturuusua uhanalaisten lajien lisäksi -> Löytää herkät alueet ja paikallistaa vieraslajien uhka Tieto esitetään 1 kilometrin ruuduissa. Aineistosta on julkaistu kaksi erillistä versiota. -VaylanvarsienVieraslajitJaArvokkaatElinymparistot_avoin: Avoin versio, jonka lajitietoa on karkeistettu mahdollisista herkistä lajeista johtuen. Aineisto kuuluu SYKEn avoimiin aineistoihin (CC BY 4.0) ja sitä saa käyttää lisenssiehtojen mukaisesti -VaylanvarsienVieraslajitJaArvokkaatElinymparistot_kayttorajoitettu: Alkuperäinen karkeistamaton versio. Tämä versio on vain viranomaiskäyttöön eikä kyseistä aineistoa saa jakaa Aineistosta on tehty tarkempi menetelmäkuvaus https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/VierasVayla_Menetelmakuvaus.pdf sekä muuttujaseloste https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/VierasVayla_VariableDescription.xlsx ENG The purpose of the material is to: -Identify road and rail areas that have nearby observations of endangered and near threatened species -Identify road and rail areas with good meadow indicator plant species -Identify road and rail areas along which there are protected areas -Identify the road and rail areas along which there are observations of Lupinus polyphyllus or Rosa rugosa observations -Identify the road and rail areas along which there are Lupinus polyphyllus or Rosa rugosa observations in addition to sensitive species -> Finds sensitive areas and identify the overall threat of alien species The data is presented in 1-kilometer square grid cells. There are two separate versions of the data. -VaylanvarsienVieraslajitJaArvokkaatElinymparistot_avoin: Open access version, in which its species-related parts have been simplified due to data restriction issues. The material belongs to Syke's open materials (CC BY 4.0) and may be used in accordance with the license terms. -VaylanvarsienVieraslajitJaArvokkaatElinymparistot_kayttorajoitettu: Original version. This version is only for official use and the material in question may not be shared. A more precise description about the data procedures can be found from (In Finnish) https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/VierasVayla_Menetelmakuvaus.pdf Furthermore, all the variables in the data are explained in this bilingual variable description https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/VierasVayla_VariableDescription.xlsx This dataset was updated with the newest species observations on 10/2023 and 11/2024 Process code for this can be found from https://github.com/PossibleSolutions/VierasVayla_SpeciesUpdate

  • FIN Järvien vesikasvillisuusvyöhykettä kuvaava aineisto 1971 suomalaisesta järvivesimuodostumasta. Aineisto on polygonivektorimuodossa, jossa yksittäisen järven vesikasvivyöhyke esitetään moniosaisena polygonina. Vesikasvillisuusvyöhyke koostuu ilmakuvilta erottuvasta vedenpinnan yläpuolisesta (ilmaversoinen ja kelluslehtinen) ja aivan vedenpinnan tasolle yltävästä uposlehtisestä kasvillisuudesta. Vesikasvillisuusvyöhykkeen ja järven 0–3 metrin syvyysvyöhykkeen perusteella järville on laskettu kasvittumisaste-niminen tunnusluku, jota käytetään järvien ekologisen tilan arvioinnissa kuvaamaan rehevöitymisen aiheuttamaa kasvillisuuden runsastumista. Vesikasvillisuusvyöhyke on analysoitu Picterra-yrityksen koneoppimismalleilla Maanmittauslaitoksen hallinnoimista väri-infra- eli vääräväriortokuvista vuosilta 2012-2023. Vyöhykkeen analysointi on rajattu 1.7.–10.9. otettuihin ortokuviin. Lisäksi analysointi on rajattu seuraaviin vesienhoidon suunnittelun 3. suunnittelukaudella määritettyihin järvityyppeihin: • Pienet humusjärvet • Keskikokoiset humusjärvet • Runsashumuksiset järvet • Matalat humusjärvet • Matalat runsashumuksiset järvet Aineisto sisältää 698 järvivesimuodostumalta ilmakuvatulkinnan useammalta vuodelta. Havaittu kasvittumisaste on laskettu niille 977 järvivesimuodostumalle, joilta oli saatavissa tieto 0–3 metrin syvyysvyöhykkeestä. Aineistoon on jätetty järviä ilman syvyysaineistoa ja siten kasvittumisasteen laskentaa siinä tarkoituksessa, jotta aineistoa voidaan tarvittaessa hyödyntää muuhunkin kuin kasvittumisaste-muuttujaan perustuvaan tila-arviointiin. Aineistolle on tehty silmämääräinen tarkastus virheellisten havaintojen poistamiseksi. Aineisto voi silti sisältää väärintulkintoja. Kasvittumisasteen luontaisen vaihtelun mallintamisesta saadut tunnusluvut, kuten odotetut kasvittumisasteet ja kasvittumisasteeseen perustuva ekologinen tilaluokka, ovat ympäristöhallinnon asiantuntijoiden katseltavissa Pisara-järjestelmässä. Käyttötarkoitus: Ympäristöhallinnon tehtävien tueksi vesien tilan arviointiin. Järvien ekologisen tilan arviointia tekevät asiantuntijat käyttävät paikkatietoaineistoa ilmakuvatulkinnan laadun arvioimiseen yksittäisellä järvellä. Asiasanat: kaukokartoitus, ilmakuvat, vesikasvillisuus, seuranta, ekologinen tila Lisätietoja: https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/Jarvien_vesikasvillisuusvyohykkeet.pdf https://vesi.fi/aineistopankki/koneoppimispohjaiseen-ilmakuvatulkintaan-perustuva-jarvien-vesikasvillisuuden-tilanarviointi/ ENG This data describes lake macrophyte zone on 1971 Finnish lake waterbodies. The spatial features are represented as multi-part polygons. The attributes are in Finnish. The zone represents emergent and floating-leaved vegetation plus submerged vegetation just above the surface of water. Together with lake bathymetric data, the percentage of vegetated littoral (PVL) was calculated. The PVL is applied in ecological status assessment. Lake macrophyte zone was detected from color-infrared aerial orthophotos administered by the National Land Survey of Finland. The detections were performed with the help of a custom machine learning model trained using Picterra. The detections were applied to orthophotos in 2012-2013 which were filmed between 1st of July and 10th of September. The detections were limited to humic and humic-rich lake waterbodies. There are detections from multiple years for 698 lake waterbodies. Observed PVL were calculated on 977 lake waterbodies which have bathymetric data to identify the 0 to 3 meters deep littoral zone. To potentially utilize the data for more than just the PVL-based approach, the data also have detections on waterbodies without bathymetric data and therefore observed PVL. A visual inspection of the data has been performed to remove erroneous detections. The data may still contain misinterpretations. Purpose of use: Support of environmental administration in ecological status assessment. More information: https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/Jarvien_vesikasvillisuusvyohykkeet.pdf https://vesi.fi/aineistopankki/koneoppimispohjaiseen-ilmakuvatulkintaan-perustuva-jarvien-vesikasvillisuuden-tilanarviointi/

  • Categories  

    This assessment was part of project Baltic ForBio funded by the Interreg Baltic Sea Region Programme (https://www.slu.se/en/departments/forest-economics/forskning/research-projects/baltic-forbio/). The project was carried out in 2017-2020. The harvesting potentials in Finland were calculated for the following assortments: • Stemwood for energy from thinnings, pine • Stemwood for energy from thinnings, spruce • Stemwood for energy from thinnings, broadleaved • Stemwood for energy from thinnings (smaller than pulpwood-sized trees), pine • Stemwood for energy from thinnings (smaller than pulpwood-sized trees), spruce • Stemwood for energy from thinnings (smaller than pulpwood-sized trees), broadleaved • Logging residues, pine • Logging residues, spruce • Logging residues, deciduos • Stumps, pine • Stumps, spruce. 1.1 Decision support system used in assessment Regional energywood potentials were calculated with MELA forest planning tool (Siitonen et al. 1996; Hirvelä et al. 2017). 1.2 References and further reading Anttila P., Muinonen E., Laitila J. 2013. Nostoalueen kannoista jää viidennes maahan. [One fifth of the stumps on a stump harvesting area stays in the ground]. BioEnergia 3: 10–11. Anttila P., Nivala V., Salminen O., Hurskainen M., Kärki J., Lindroos T.J. & Asikainen A. 2018. Re-gional balance of forest chip supply and demand in Finland in 2030. Silva Fennica vol. 52 no. 2 article id 9902. 20 p. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.9902 Hakkila, P. 1978. Pienpuun korjuu polttoaineeksi. Summary: Harvesting small-sized wood for fuel. Folia Forestalia 342. 38 p. Hirvelä, H., Härkönen, K., Lempinen, R., Salminen, O. 2017. MELA2016 Reference Manual. Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke). 547 p. Hynynen, J., Ojansuu, R., Hökkä, H., Siipilehto, J., Salminen, H. & Haapala, P. 2002. Models for predicting stand development in MELA System. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 835. 116 p. Koistinen A., Luiro J., Vanhatalo K. 2016. Metsänhoidon suositukset energiapuun korjuuseen, työopas. [Guidelines for sustainable harvesting of energy wood]. Metsäkustannus Oy, Helsinki. ISBN 978-952-5632-35-4. 74 p. Mäkisara, K., Katila, M., Peräsaari, J. 2019: The Multi-Source National Forest Inventory of Finland - methods and results 2015. Muinonen E., Anttila P., Heinonen J., Mustonen J. 2013. Estimating the bioenergy potential of forest chips from final fellings in Central Finland based on biomass maps and spatially explicit constraints. Silva Fennica 47(4) article 1022. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1022. Natural Resources Institute Finland. 2019. Industrial roundwood removals by region. Available at: http://stat.luke.fi/en/industrial-roundwood-removals-by-region. Accessed 22 Nov 2019. Ruotsalainen, M. 2007. Hyvän metsänhoidon suositukset turvemaille. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapio julkaisusarja 26. Metsäkustannus Oy, Helsinki. 51 p. ISBN 978-952-5694-16-1, ISSN 1239-6117. Siitonen M, Härkönen K, Hirvelä H, Jämsä J, Kilpeläinen H, Salminen O et al. 1996. MELA Handbook. 622. 951-40-1543-6. Äijälä, O., Kuusinen, M. & Koistinen, A. (eds.). 2010. Hyvän metsänhoidon suositukset: energiapuun korjuu ja kasvatus. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisusarja 30. 56 p. ISBN 978-952-5694-59-8, ISSN 1239-6117. Äijälä, O., Koistinen, A., Sved, J., Vanhatalo, K. & Väisänen, P. (eds). 2014. Metsänhoidon suositukset. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisuja. 180 p. ISBN 978-952-6612-32-4. 2. Output considered in assessment Valid for scenario: Maximum sustained removal Main output ☒Small-diameter trees ☒Stemwood for energy ☒Logging residues ☒Stumps ☐Bark ☐Pulpwood ☐Saw logs Additional information Stemwood for energy from thinnings. Part of this potential consists of trees smaller than pulpwood size. This part is reported as Stemwood for energy from thinnings (smaller than pulpwood-sized trees). Forecast period for the biomass supply assessment Start year: 2016 End year: 2045 Results presented for period 2026-2035 3. Description of scenarios included in the assessments Maximum sustained removal The maximum sustained removal is defined by maximizing the net present value with 4% discount rate subject to non-declining periodic total roundwood removals, energy wood removals and net incomes, further the saw log removals have to remain at least at the level of the first period. There are no sustainability constraints concerning tree species, cutting methods, age classes or the growth/drain -ratio in order to efficiently utilize the dynamics of forest structure. Energy wood removal can consist of stems, cutting residues, stumps and roots. According to the scenario the total annual harvesting potential of industrial roundwood is 79 mill. m3 (over bark) for period 2026-2035. In 2018 removals of industrial roundwood in Finland totaled 68.9 mill. m3 (Natural Resources… 2019). 4. Forest data characteristics Level of detail on forest description ☒High ☐Medium ☐Low NFI data with many and detailed variables down to tree parts. Sample plot based ☒Yes ☐No NFI sample plot data from 2014-2018. Stand based ☐Yes ☒No Grid based ☒Yes ☐No Multi-Source NFI data from 2017 (Mäkisara et al. 2019) utilized when distributing regional potentials to 1 km2 resolution. 5. Forest available for wood supply: Total forest area defined as in: FAO. 2012. FRA 2015, Terms and Definitions. Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper 180. 36 p. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/ap862e/ap862e00.pdf. Forest and scrub land 22 812 000 ha Forest land 20 278 000 ha and scrub land 2 534 000 ha Forest area not available for wood supply Forest and scrub land 2 979 000 ha Forest land 1 849 000 ha and scrub land 1 130 000 ha Partly available for wood supply Forest and scrub land 2 553 000 ha (includes in FAWS, below) Forest land 1 149 000 ha and scrub land 1 404 000 ha. Forest Available for wood supply (FAWS) Forest and scrub land 19 833 000 ha Forest land 18 429 000 ha and scrub land 1 404 000 ha In MELA calculations all the scrub land belonging to the FAWS belongs to the category “Partly available for wood supply”, but there are no logging events on scrub land regardless or the category. 6. Temporal allocation of fellings Valid for scenario: Maximum sustained removal Allocation method ☐Optimization based without even flow constraints ☒Optimization based with even flow constraints ☐Rule based with no harvest target ☐Rule based with static harvest target ☐Rule based with dynamic harvest target See item 3 above (max NPV with 4 % discount rate). 7. Forest management Valid for scenario: Maximum sustained removal Representation of forest management ☐Rule based ☒Optimization ☐Implicit Treatments, among of the optimization makes the selections, are based on management guidelines (e.g. Äijälä etc 2014) 7.2 General assumptions on forest management Valid for scenario: Maximum sustained removal ☒Complies with current legal requirements ☐Complies with certification ☒Represents current practices ☐None of the above ☐ No information available Forest management follows science-based guidelines of sustainable forest management (Ruotsalainen 2007, Äijälä et al. 2010, Äijälä et al. 2014). 7.3 Detailed assumptions on natural processes and forest management Valid for scenario: Maximum sustainable removal Natural processes ☒Tree growth ☒Tree decay ☒Tree death ☐Other? Tree-level models (e.g. Hynynen et al., 2002). Silvicultural system ☒Even-aged ☐Uneven-aged Click here to enter text. Regeneration method ☒Artificial ☒Natural Regeneration species ☐Current distribution ☒Changed distribution Optimal distribution may differ from the current one. Genetically improved plant material ☐Yes ☒No Cleaning ☒Yes ☐No Thinning ☒Yes ☐No Fertilization ☐Yes ☒No 7.4 Detailed constraints on biomass supply Volume or area left on site at final felling ☒Yes ☐No 5 m3/ha retained trees are left in final fellings. Final fellings can be carried out only on FAWS with no restrictions for wood supply. Constraints for residues extraction ☒Yes ☐No ☐N/A Retention of 30% of logging residues onsite (Koistinen et al. 2016). Dry-matter loss 20% for logging residues, 5% for stemwood. Constraints for stump extraction ☒Yes ☐No ☐N/A Retention of 16–18% of stump biomass (Muinonen et al. 2013; Anttila et al. 2013) Dry-matter loss 5%. 8. External factors Valid for scenario: Maximum sustained removal External factors besides forest management having effect on outcomes Economy ☐Yes ☒No Climate change ☐Yes ☒No Calamities ☐Yes ☒No Other external ☐Yes ☒No

  • Conditionality refers to the basic requirements that farmers' payments are conditional upon. Conditionality requirements are the baseline level for which you do not receive a separate payment. Aid is only granted for activities that go beyond the conditionality requirements. Conditionality consists of GAEC, statutory management requirements and social conditionality. Statutory management requirements relate to environmental issues, public health, i.e. food and feed safety, plant health and animal health and welfare. All conditionality requirements are described in this guide. When you apply for farmer payments, you agree to comply with the conditionality requirements. A landscape feature can be a tree, group of trees, transplanted block or other similar natural feature that is protected for its beauty, rarity, landscape significance, scientific value or other similar reason. Qualifying landscape features are sites protected under Article 95 of the Nature Conservation Act (9/2023) and located within a base parcel, on the periphery of a base parcel or in the area between adjacent base parcels. Protected sites must always be preserved and must not be damaged or removed. If a protected landscape feature is located on an area of 0,2 ha or less, it may be included in the area of the base parcel. If you wish to include a protected site in the eligible area, please declare the sites on the Food Agency's form 442 when applying for arable aid. The area of a landscape feature will only become part of the eligible area of the base parcel in the year following the submission of the declaration. Who makes conservation decisions on sites? If the site to be protected is located on private land, the decision to protect the site is taken by the municipality's environmental protection authority. The municipality is also responsible for marking the site on the land. On private land, protection is only granted on application or with the consent of the landowner. On application by the owner or on a proposal from the ELY Centre, the municipality may terminate the protection of a landscape feature if there are no longer grounds for protecting it or if the protection prevents the implementation of a project or plan of public interest. The application must be accompanied by the opinion of the ELY Centre. If the matter has been initiated on the basis of a proposal from the ELY Centre, the owner of the site must be given the opportunity to be heard. For more information: https://www.ruokavirasto.fi/tuet/maatalous/perusehdot/ehdollisuus/ehdollisuuden-opas/ehdollisuuden-opas-2025/

  • Tämän aineiston tarkemmat metodikuvaukset löytyvät artikkeleista (Holmberg et al. 2023, Junttila et al. 2023). Tässä on kuvattu aineistoa ja sen valmistelua. Tarkoituksena on ollut tuottaa alueellista tietoa maanpeitteen merkityksestä kasvihuonekaasupäästöihin Suomessa. Lähtöaineisto ja metodit rajoittavat tarkkuutta, mutta aineisto soveltuu paikallisten, esimerkiksi maakuntatason ilmiöiden tarkasteluun. Aineisto edustaa lyhyttä ajanjaksoa. Maanpeiteaineisto perustuu rekisteritietoihin ja kaukokartoitusaineistoon vuosilta 2015-2020, lukuun ottamatta maaperäaineistoa, jokia ja järviä. Aineisto on rasterimuotoista ja tallennettu GeoTiff-formaatissa, joka on yhteensopiva useimpien paikkatieto-ohjelmistojen kanssa. Greenhouse gas net emission intensities by land cover category in Finland The methods related to the data published herein are described in detail in the associated publications (Holmberg et al. 2023, Junttila et al. 2023). This file describes the datasets and the data preparation steps. The aim of this data publication is to provide regional assessments of the role of land cover in greenhouse gas emissions in Finland. The results in the publications are reported for the large administrative divisions, the NUTS 3 regions of mainland Finland (Statistics Finland 2023a). While limited by the accuracy of the methods and source data involved, these data can also be used for more local assessments, e.g., at the scale of municipalities. The data represent a temporal snapshot of land cover. Except for the soil maps, rivers and lakes, all land cover data are from the period 2015-2020 and are based on registry data or remote sensing. Data format. The data are distributed as GeoTiff raster files, which can be read using most GIS-software.

  • KUVAUS: Jätehuoltomääräysten biojätteen velvoitealue. Tampereen keskustaajaman alue esitetään kartalla keltaisella. Tampereen keskustaajamassa velvoite on ollut voimassa 1.9.2023 alkaen. Biojätteen velvoitealueen laajennusalueet esitetään kartalla sinisellä. Laajennusalueiden velvoite tulee voimaan siirtymäajan jälkeen, 30.9.2025 mennessä. PÄIVITYS: Satunnainen (vain tarvittaessa). YLLÄPITOSOVELLUS: Tampereen kaupungin tiedostopalvelin ja PostGIS-tietokanta KOORDINAATTIJÄRJESTELMÄ: Aineisto tallennetaan ETRS-GK24FIN (EPSG:3878) tasokoordinaattijärjestelmässä GEOMETRIA: vektori (alue) SAATAVUUS: Aineisto on tallennettu Postgis-tietokantaan. JULKISUUS: Aineisto on nähtävillä julkisesti kaikille käyttäjille Oskari-karttapalvelussa. TIETOSUOJA: Aineistoon ei liity tietosuojakysymyksiä. AINEISTOSTA VASTAAVA TAHO: Tampereen kaupunki, Alueellinen jätehuoltolautakunta, jatehuoltolautakunta@tampere.fi

  • The Regional Stream Water Geochemical Mapping data set gives information on the elemental concentrations in organic sediments of small headwater streams. The samples have been taken from small headwater streams (catchment area under 30 km2) in the late summer of 1990. Sampling has been repeated for about every fourth point during the years 1995, 2000 and 2006. The number of samples was 1162 in 1990 (at a density of one sample / 300 km2), 286 in 1995, 286 in 2000 and 249 in 2006. The data set covers the whole of Finland. Stream water samples have also been taken at the same time. Sampling, processing and analysis methods have been described in the Geochemical Atlas of Finland, Part 3, p. 27 - 30 (Lahermo et. al 1996). Field observations, coordinates and element concentrations determined from samples have been made into a database, in which each record represents one sample point. The data for each sampling year have been recorded on different tables. The method of analysis is referred to with a four-character method code. The codes are as follows: 503H = mercury determination using the cold vapour method 503P = nitric acid extraction in a microwave oven, measurement with ICP-AES 503M = nitric acid extraction in a microwave oven, measurement with ICP-MS 820L = carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen determination with a LECO analyser. The element concentration data include a numerical concentration value (as mg kg-1 or ppm) and possibly a check mark. The concentration is recorded as a variable, which has a name that comprises the chemical symbol for the element and the code for the method of analysis. For example AS_503M is arsenic (As) concentration, which is determined with the ICP-MS method (503M). The next variable has a check mark, for example AS_503MT. If the numerical value following the check mark is ‘>’ or '‘<’ then the number recorded in the concentration field is the determination limit of the chemical analytical method used and the actual concentration is less than this value. If the check mark is an exclamation mark (!), the analytical result is smaller than the determination limit of the analytical method use but the (unreliable) value obtained with the measuring instrument has been entered in the database. There is no data are if the check mark is a 'x'. The original purpose of the Regional Stream Water Geochemical Mapping data set was national general geochemical mapping and the basic assessment of environmental state. Other uses are, for example, the assessment of changes in environmental state and determination of the baseline concentrations of surface water as part of the evaluation of the chemical state of catchment areas in accordance with the Water Framework Directive of the EU.

  • This dataset represents the Integrated biodiversity status assessment for benthic habitats using the BEAT tool. Status is shown in five categories based on the integrated assessment scores obtained in the tool. Biological Quality Ratios (BQR) above 0.6 correspond to good status. The assessment in open sea areas was based on the core indicators ‘State of the soft-bottom macrofauna community’ and ‘Oxygen debt’. Coastal areas were assessed by national indicators, and may hence not be directly comparable with each other. This dataset displays the result of the integrated biodiverity status in HELCOM Assessment unit Scale 4 (Division of the Baltic Sea into 17 sub-basins and further division into coastal and off-shore areas and division of the coastal areas by WFD water types or water bodies). Attribute information: "BQR" = Biological Quality Ratio "Confidence" = Confidence of the assessment "HELCOM_ID" = id of the HELCOM assessment unit "country" = name of the country / opensea "level_2" = HELCOM sub-basins (name of the scale 2 assessment unit) "Name" = Name of the coastal assessment unit on scale 4 "AULEVEL" = scale of the assessment units "type_descr" = Name of the HELCOM scale 4 assessment unit "SAUID" = ID number for the spatial assessment unit "EcosystemC" = Ecosystem component assessed "Confiden_1" = Confidence of the assessment (0-1, higher values mean higher confidence) "Total_numb" = Number of indicators used in assessment "Area_km2" = Area of assessment unit (km2) "Confiden_1" = Confidence level of the assessment (scores < 0.5 = low, 0.5 - 0.75 = intermediate, > 0.75 = high) "STATUS" = Integrated status category (0-0.2 = not good (lowest score), 0.2-0.4 = not good (lower score), 0.4-0.6 = not good (low score), 0.6-0.8 = good (high score), 0.8-1.0 = good (highest score))

  • This dataset represents the integrated assessment of hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea in 2011-2016, assessed using the CHASE tool (https://github.com/helcomsecretariat/CHASE-integration-tool). The integration is based on hazardous substances core indicators covering concentrations of hazardous substances. This dataset displays the result of the assessment in HELCOM Assessment unit Level 3 (Division of the Baltic Sea into 17 sub-basins and further division into coastal and offshore areas). Attribute information: "HELCOM_ID" = ID of the HELCOM scale 3 assessment unit "country" = Country/ opensea "level_3" = Name of the HELCOM scale 3 assessment unit "area_km2 = Area of the HELCOM scale 3 assessment unit "AULEVEL" = Scale of the assessment units "coastal" = Code of scale 3 HELCOM assessment unit "Input" = Contamination ratio of the assessment unit (Higher score indicates higher contamination) "Confidence" = Confidence of the assessment (Low/ Moderate/ High/ Not assessed) "Status" = Status value for the assessment (= 1.0: Low contamination score, > 1.0: High contaminantion score)

  • The EMODnet (European Marine Observation and Data network) Geology project collects and harmonizes marine geological data from the European sea areas to support decision making and sustainable marine spatial planning. The partnership includes 39 marine organizations from 30 countries. The partners, mainly from the marine departments of the geological surveys of Europe (through the Association of European Geological Surveys-EuroGeoSurveys), have assembled marine geological information at various scales from all European sea areas (e.g. the White Sea, Baltic Sea, Barents Sea, the Iberian Coast, and the Mediterranean Sea within EU waters). This dataset includes EMODnet seabed substrate maps at a scale of 1:50 000 from the European marine areas. Traditionally, European countries have conducted their marine geological surveys according to their own national standards and classified substrates on the grounds of their national classification schemes. These national classifications are harmonised into a shared EMODnet schema using Folk's sediment triangle with a hierarchy of 16, 7 and 5 substrate classes. The data describes the seabed substrate from the uppermost 30 cm of the sediment column. Further information about the EMODnet Geology project is available on the portal (http://www.emodnet-geology.eu/).