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

NLS-FI INSPIRE View Service for Administrative Units Theme is an INSPIRE compliant Web Map Service. It contains the following harmonized INSPIRE map layers: AdministrativeUnit, AdministrativeBoundary, Baseline, TerritorialSea, ExclusiveEconomicZone, MaritimeBoundary.InternalWaters, MaritimeBoundary.TerritorialSea ,MaritimeBoundary.ExclusiveEconomicZone. The service is based on the NLS-FI INSPIRE Administrative Units dataset. The dataset is administrated by the National Land Survey of Finland.

FIN Suomen hiekkarantoja ja niiden taustatekijöitä kuvaava aineisto. Datan taustalla olevan hankkeen pääasiallisena tarkoituksena on hiekkarantojen identifioiminen parhaasta käytettävissä olevasta tiedosta, näiden rantojen ominaispiirteiden kuvaaminen, ympäristöllisen arvon arvioiminen sekä hoitotarpeessa olevien rantojen löytäminen. Aineistosta on julkaistu kaksi erillistä versiota. -HiekkarantojenOminaisuudet_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 -HiekkarantojenOminaisuudet_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/RantaPutte_Menetelmakuvaus.pdf sekä muuttujaseloste https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/RantaPutte_VariableDescription.xlsx ENG This data describes Finnish sandy beaches and their background factors. The main purpose of the project underlying the data is to identify sandy beaches from the best available information, to describe the characteristics of these beaches, to assess their environmental value and to find beaches in need of conservation There are two separate versions of the data. -HiekkarantojenOminaisuudet_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. -HiekkarantojenOminaisuudet_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/RantaPutte_Menetelmakuvaus.pdf All the variables in the data are explained in this bilingual variable description https://geoportal.ymparisto.fi/meta/julkinen/dokumentit/RantaPutte_VariableDescription.xlsx

The raw materials of forest chips are small-diameter trees from thinning fellings and logging residues and stumps from final fellings. The harvesting potential consists of biomass that would be available after technical and economic constraints. Such constraints include, e.g., minimum removal of energywood per hectare, site fertility and recovery rate. Note that the techno-economic potential is usually higher than the actual availability, which depends on forest owners’ willingness to sell and competitive situation. The harvesting potentials were estimated using the sample plots of the 12th national forest inventory (NFI12) measured in the years 2014–2018. First, a large number of sound and sustainable management schedules for five consecutive ten-year periods were simulated for each sample plot using a large-scale Finnish forest planning system known as MELA (Siitonen et al. 1996; Hirvelä et al. 2017; http://mela2.metla.fi/mela/tupa/index-en.php). MELA simulations consisted of natural processes and human actions. The ingrowth, growth, and mortality of trees were predicted based on a set of distance-independent tree-level statistical models (e.g. Hynynen et al. 2002) included in MELA and the simulation of the stand (sample plot)-level management actions was based on the current Finnish silvicultural guidelines (Äijälä et al. 2014) and the guidelines for harvesting of energy wood (Koistinen et al. 2016). Future potentials were assumed to materialize when the industrial roundwood fellings followed the level of maximum sustained yield (79 mill. m3 in this calculation). The maximum sustained yield was defined such that the net present value calculated with a 4% discount rate was maximized subject to non-declining periodic industrial roundwood and energy wood removals and net incomes, and subject to the saw log removal remaining at least at the level of the first period. There were no constraints concerning tree species selection, cutting methods, age classes, or the growth/drain ratio in order to efficiently utilize the dynamics of forest structure. The potential for energywood from thinnings was calculated separately for all the energywood from thinnings (Stemwood for energy from thinnings) and for material that does not fulfill the size-requirements for pulpwood (Stemwood for energy from thinnings (smaller than pulpwood-sized trees)). Note that the decision whether pulpwood-sized thinning wood is directed to energy or industrial use, is based on the optimisation by MELA. The minimum top diameter of pulpwood in the calculation was 6.3 cm for pine (Pinus sylvestris) and 6.5 cm for spruce (Picea abies) and broadleaved species (mainly Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Populus tremula, Alnus incana, A. glutinosa and Salix spp.). The minimum length of a pulpwood log was assumed at 2.0 m. Energywood could be harvested as whole trees or as delimbed. The dry-matter loss in the supply chain was assumed at 5%. The potentials for logging residues and stumps were calculated as follows: The crown biomass removals of clear fellings were obtained from MELA. According to harvesting guidelines for energywood (Koistinen et al. 2016) mineral soils classified as sub-xeric (or weaker) and peatlands with corresponding low nutrient levels were left out from the potentials. Next, technical recovery rates were applied (70% for logging residues and 82-84% for stumps) (Koistinen et al. 2016; Muinonen et al. 2013). Finally, a dry-matter loss of 20% and 5% was assumed for residues and stumps, respectively. The techno-economical harvesting potentials were first calculated for nineteen Finnish regions and then distributed on a raster grid at 1 km × 1 km resolution by weighting with Multi-Source NFI biomasses as described by Anttila et al. (2018). The potentials represent time period 2026-2035 and are presented as average annual potentials in solid cubic metres over bark. References Äijälä O, Koistinen A, Sved J, Vanhatalo K, Väisänen P. 2014. Metsänhoidon suositukset. [Guidelines for sustainable forest management]. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisuja. Anttila P., Nivala V., Salminen O., Hurskainen M., Kärki J., Lindroos T.J. & Asikainen A. 2018. Regional balance of forest chip supply and demand in Finland in 2030. Silva Fennica vol. 52 no. 2 article id 9902. 20 s. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.9902 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, Salminen H, Siipilehto J, Haapala P. 2002. Models for predicting the stand development – description of biological processes in MELA system. The Finnish Forest Research Institute Research Papers. 835. Koistinen A, Luiro J, Vanhatalo K. 2016. Metsänhoidon suositukset energiapuun korjuuseen, työopas. [Guidelines for sustainable harvesting of energy wood]. Tapion julkaisuja. 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. Siitonen M, Härkönen K, Hirvelä H, Jämsä J, Kilpeläinen H, Salminen O et al. 1996. MELA Handbook. 622. 951-40-1543-6.

Potential cumulative impacts on benthic habitats is based on the same method than <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/9477be37-94a9-4201-824a-f079bc27d097" target="_blank">Baltic Sea Impact Index</a>, but is focused on physical pressures and benthic habitats. The dataset was created based on separate analysis for potential cumulative impacts on only the benthic habitats, as these are particularly affected by physical pressures. In this case the evaluation was based on pressure layers representing <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/ea0ef0fa-0517-40a9-866a-ce22b8948c88" target="_blank">physical loss</a> and <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/05e325f3-bc30-44a0-8f0b-995464011c82" target="_blank">physical disturbance</a>, combined with information on the distribution of eight broad benthic habitat types and five habitat-forming species (<a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/363cb353-46da-43f4-9906-7324738fe2c3" target="_blank">Furcellaria lumbricalis</a>, <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/f9cc7b2c-4080-4b19-8c38-cac87955cb91" target="_blank">Mytilus edulis</a>, <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/264ed572-403c-43bd-9707-345de8b9503c" target="_blank"> Fucus sp.</a>, <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/822ddece-d96a-4036-9ad8-c4b599776eca" target="_blank">Charophytes</a> and <a href="http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/ca327bb1-d3cb-46c2-8316-f5f62f889090" target="_blank">Zostera marina</a>). The potential cumulative impacts has been estimated based on currently best available data, but spatial and temporal gaps may occur in underlying datasets. Please scroll down to "Lineage" and visit <a href="http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/cumulative-impacts/" target="_blank">State of the Baltic Sea website</a> for more info.

The raw materials of forest chips in Biomass Atlas are small-diameter trees from first thinning fellings and logging residues and stumps from final fellings. The harvesting potential consists of biomass that would be available after technical and economic constraints. Such constraints include, e.g., minimum removal of energywood per hectare, site fertility and recovery rate. Note that the techno-economic potential is usually higher than the actual availability, which depends on forest owners’ willingness to sell and competitive situation. The harvesting potentials were estimated using the sample plots of the 11th and 12th national forest inventory (NFI11 and NFI12) measured in the years 2013–2017. First, a large number of sound and sustainable management schedules for five consecutive ten-year periods were simulated for each sample plot using a large-scale Finnish forest planning system known as MELA (Siitonen et al. 1996; Hirvelä et al. 2017). MELA simulations consisted of natural processes and human actions. The ingrowth, growth, and mortality of trees were predicted based on a set of distance-independent tree-level statistical models (e.g. Hynynen et al. 2002) included in MELA and the simulation of the stand (sample plot)-level management actions was based on the current Finnish silvicultural guidelines (Äijälä et al. 2014) and the guidelines for harvesting of energy wood (Koistinen et al. 2016). Future potentials were assumed to materialize when the industrial roundwood fellings followed the level of maximum sustainable removals (80.7 mill. m3 in this calculation). The maximum sustainable removals were defined such that the net present value calculated with a 4% discount rate was maximized subject to non-declining periodic industrial roundwood and energy wood removals and net incomes, and subject to the saw log removal remaining at least at the level of the first period. There were no constraints concerning tree species selection, cutting methods, age classes, or the growth/drain ratio in order to efficiently utilize the dynamics of forest structure. The potential for energywood from first thinnings was calculated separately for all the wood from first thinnings (Small-diameter trees from first thinnings) and for material that does not fulfill the size-requirements for pulpwood (Small-diameter trees from first thinnings, smaller than pulpwood). The minimum top diameter of pulpwood in the calculation was 6.3 cm for pine (Pinus sylvestris) and 6.5 cm for spruce (Picea abies) and broadleaved species (mainly Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Populus tremula, Alnus incana, A. glutinosa and Salix spp.). The minimum length of a pulpwood log was assumed at 2.0 m. The potentials do not include branches. The potentials for logging residues and stumps were calculated as follows: The biomass removals of clear fellings were obtained from MELA. According to harvesting guidelines for energywood (Koistinen et al. 2016) mineral soils classified as sub-xeric (or weaker) and peatlands with corresponding low nutrient levels were left out from the potentials. Finally, technical recovery rates were applied (70% for logging residues and 82-84% for stumps) (Koistinen et al. 2016; Muinonen et al. 2013) The techno-economical harvesting potentials were first calculated for nineteen Finnish regions and then distributed on a raster grid at 1 km × 1 km resolution by weighting with Multi-Source NFI biomasses as described by Anttila et al. (2018). The potentials represent time period 2025-2034 and are presented as average annual potentials in solid cubic metres over bark. References Äijälä O, Koistinen A, Sved J, Vanhatalo K, Väisänen P. 2014. Metsänhoidon suositukset. [Guidelines for sustainable forest management]. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisuja. Anttila P., Nivala V., Salminen O., Hurskainen M., Kärki J., Lindroos T.J. & Asikainen A. 2018. Regional balance of forest chip supply and demand in Finland in 2030. Silva Fennica vol. 52 no. 2 article id 9902. 20 s. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.9902 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, Salminen H, Siipilehto J, Haapala P. 2002. Models for predicting the stand development – description of biological processes in MELA system. The Finnish Forest Research Institute Research Papers. 835. Koistinen A, Luiro J, Vanhatalo K. 2016. Metsänhoidon suositukset energiapuun korjuuseen, työopas. [Guidelines for sustainable harvesting of energy wood]. Tapion julkaisuja. 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. Siitonen M, Härkönen K, Hirvelä H, Jämsä J, Kilpeläinen H, Salminen O et al. 1996. MELA Handbook. 622. 951-40-1543-6.

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 contains borders of the HELCOM MPAs (former Baltic Sea Protected Areas (BSPAs). The dataset has been compiled from data submitted by HELCOM Contracting Parties. It includes the borders of designated HELCOM MPAs stored in the http://mpas.helcom.fi. The designation is based on the HELCOM Recommendation 15/5 (1994). The dataset displays all designated or managed MPAs as officially reported to HELCOM by the respective Contracting Party. The latest related HELCOM publication based on MPA related data is http://www.helcom.fi/Lists/Publications/BSEP148.pdf The dataset contains the following information: MPA_ID: Unique ID of the MPA as used in HELCOM Marine Protected Areas database Name: Name of the MPA Country: Country where MPA is located Site_link: Direct link to site's fact sheet in the http://mpas.helcom.fi where additional information is available MPA_status: Management status of the MPA Date_est: Establishment date of the MPA Year_est: Establishment year of the MPA