KUVAUS: Karttatason kohteet ovat peräisin LUMO-asukaskyselystä marraskuulta 2024. Aineisto on kerätty Fiilis-karttakyselyllä (Ilmasto- ja ympäristöpolitiikan yksikkö). Kysely oli osa lumo-ohjelman päivityksen vuorovaikutusprosessia. Vastaajaa pyydettiin merkitsemään kartalle pisteitä tai alueita, joissa on havainnut 1) myönteisiä muutoksia tai 2) kielteisiä muutoksia luonnon monimuotoisuudessa viimeisen neljän vuoden aikana. Kartalle sai myös merkitä pisteitä tai alueita, joissa olisi halukas itse toimimaan luonnon monimuotoisuuden parantamiseksi. Kyselyn vastaajamäärä oli 570 hlö. Kyselyyn pystyi vastaamaan joko suomeksi tai englanniksi. Vastaajien anonyymit taustatiedot on tarvittaessa saatavilla datan yhteyshenkilöltä. KATTAVUUS: Tampere YLLÄPITO: Kyseessä on poikkileikkausaineisto (Aineisto ei päivity). KOORDINAATTIJÄRJESTELMÄ: Aineisto tallennetaan ETRS-GK24 (EPSG:3878) tasokoordinaattijärjestelmässä. GEOMETRIA: vektori (pisteitä ja alueita) SAATAVUUS: Aineisto on katsottavissa kirjautuneille käyttäjille Oskari-karttapalvelussa. AINEISTOSTA VASTAAVA TAHO: Tampereen kaupunki, Ilmasto- ja ympäristöpolitiikan yksikkö

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.

The technical harvesting potential of logging residues and stumps from final fellings can be defined as the maximum potential procurement volume of these available from the Finnish forests based on the prevailing guidelines for harvesting of energy wood. The potentials of logging residues and stumps have been calculated for fifteen NUTS3-based Finnish regions covering the whole country (Koljonen et al. 2017). The technical harvesting potentials were estimated using the sample plots of the eleventh national forest inventory (NFI11) measured in the years 2009–2013. 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; Redsven et al. 2013). 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). Final fellings consisted of clear cutting, seed tree cutting, and shelter-wood cutting, but only the clear-cutting areas were utilized for energy wood harvesting. As both logging residues and stumps are byproducts of roundwood removals, the technical potentials of chips have to be linked with removals of industrial roundwood. Future potentials were assumed to materialize when the industrial roundwood fellings followed the level of maximum sustainable removals. 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 felling behaviour of the forest owners was not taken into account either. For the present situation in 2015, the removal of industrial roundwood was assumed to be the same as the average level in 2008–2012. Fourth, the technical harvesting potentials were derived by retention of 30% of the logging residues onsite (Koistinen et al. 2016) and respectively by retention of 16–18% of stump biomass (Muinonen et al. 2013). Next, the regional potentials were allocated to municipalities proportionally to their share of mature forests (MetINFO 2014). Subsequently, the municipality-level potentials were spread evenly on a raster grid at 1 km × 1 km resolution. Only grid cells on Forests Available for Wood Supply (FAWS) were considered in this operation. Here, FAWS was defined as follows: First, forest land was extracted from the Finnish Multi-Source National Forest Inventory (MS-NFI) 2013 data (Mäkisara et al. 2016). Second, restricted areas were excluded from forest land. The restricted areas consisted of nationally protected areas (e.g. nature parks, national parks, protection programme areas). References Äijälä O, Koistinen A, Sved J, Vanhatalo K, Väisänen P (2014) Metsänhoidon suositukset [Guidelines for sustainable forest management]. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisuja. 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]. Metsäkustannus Oy, Helsinki. Koljonen T, Soimakallio S, Asikainen A, Lanki T, Anttila P, Hildén M, Honkatukia J, Karvosenoja N, Lehtilä A, Lehtonen H, Lindroos TJ, Regina K, Salminen O, Savolahti M, Siljander R (2017) Energia ja ilmastostrategian vaikutusarviot: Yhteenvetoraportti. [Impact assessments of the Energy and Climate strategy: The summary report.] Publications of the Government´s analysis, assessment and research activities 21/2017. Mäkisara K, Katila M, Peräsaari J, Tomppo E (2016) The Multi-Source National Forest Inventory of Finland – methods and results 2013. Natural resources and bioeconomy studies 10/2016. 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 Fenn 47. Redsven V, Hirvelä H, Härkönen K, Salminen O, Siitonen M (2013) MELA2012 Reference Manual. Finnish Forest Research Institute. Siitonen M, Härkönen K, Hirvelä H, Jämsä J, Kilpeläinen H, Salminen O, Teuri M (1996) MELA Handbook. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 622. ISBN 951-40-1543-6.

WFS download service for EMODnet Seabed substrate dataset: EMODnet Seabed substrate multiscale 1:1 000 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:multiscale_1m), EMODnet Seabed substrate multiscale 1:250 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:multiscale_250k), EMODnet Seabed substrate multiscale 1:100 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:multiscale_100k), EMODnet Seabed substrate multiscale 1:50 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:multiscale_50k), EMODnet Seabed substrate 1:100 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:seabed_substrate_100k), EMODnet Seabed substrate 1:250 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:seabed_substrate_250k), EMODnet Seabed substrate 1:1 000 000 –Europe (Seabed_substrate:seabed_substrate_1m), EMODnet Sedimention rates –Europe (Seabed_substrate:sedimentation_rates). The service is based on the EMODnet Geology dataset. The dataset is administrated by the Geological Survey of Finland. The service contains all features from the dataset that are modelled as polygons.

This dataset contains the ship accidents in the Baltic Sea during the period 1989 to end of 2023. It is constructed from the annual data collected by HELCOM Contracting Parties on ship accidents in the Baltic Sea and starting from 2019 from EMSA EMCIP Database extraction (for those Contracting Parties that are member of the EU). The accident data has been compiled by the HELCOM Secretariat and EMSA. According to the decision of the HELCOM SEA 2/2001 shipping accident data compilation will include only so-called conventional ships according to the Regulation 5, Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 - any oil tanker of 150 GT and above and any other ships of 400 GT and above which are engaged in voyages to ports or offshore terminals under the jurisdiction of other Parties to the Convention. According to the agreed procedure all accidents (including but not limited to grounding, collision with other vessel or contact with fixed structures (offshore installations, wrecks, etc.), disabled vessel (e.g. machinery and/or structure failure), fire, explosions, etc.), which took place in territorial seas or EEZ of the Contracting Party irrespectively if there was pollution or not, are reported. The dataset contains the following information: Unique_ID = An unique identifier consisting of 4 digit running number and the year of the accident Country Year Date = Date (dd/mm/yyyy) Time = Time of the accident (hh:mm) Location = Location of the accident (open sea / port / port approach, from 2019 -> open sea / port) Acc_Type = Type of accident Colli_Type = Type of collision / contact (with vessel / object) Acc_Detail = More information on the accident CauseDetai = Details on the accident cause Assistance = Assistance after the accident Offence = Offence against Rule Damage = Damage to the ship HumanEleme = Occurrence / Reason of human error IceCondit = Ice conditions CrewIceTra = Crew trained for ice conditions Pollution = Pollution (Yes/No) Pollu_m3 = Pollution in m3 Pollu_t = Pollution in tonnes Pollu_Type = Type of pollution RespAction = Response actions after the accident Cargo_Type = Type of cargo Ship1_Name = Ship 1 identification (Not published after 2018) Sh1_Categ = Ship 1 type (according to AIS category) Sh1_Type = Ship 1 more detail ship type category Sh1_Hull = Ship 1 hull construction Sh1Size_gt = Ship 1 GT Sh1Sizedwt = Ship 1 DWT Sh1Draug_m = Ship 1 draught in meters / category Cause_Sh1 = Cause of accidents from ship 1 Pilot_Sh1 = Presence of pilot on ship 1 Ship2_Name = Ship 2 identification (Not published after 2018) Sh2_Categ = Ship 2 type (according to AIS category) Sh2_Type = Ship 2 more detail ship type category Sh2_Hull = Ship 2 hull construction Sh2Size_gt = Ship 2 GT Sh2Sizedwt = Ship 2 DWT Sh2Draug_m = Ship 2 draught in meters / category Cause_Sh2 = Cause of accidents from ship 2 Pilot_Sh2 = Presence of pilot on ship 2 Add_Info = Additional information Latitude = Latitude (decimal degrees) Longitude = Longitude (decimal degrees) For more information about shipping accidents in the Baltic Sea, see the HELCOM annual reports: https://helcom.fi/helcom-at-work/publications/ https://helcom.fi/media/publications/HELCOM-report-on-Shipping-accidents-in-the-Baltic-Sea-2019-211207-FINAL.pdf

The map compiles seabed samples since 1985 onwards. The data includes geographic data and metadata related to each sample, mainly based on the data produced by the Geological Survey of Finland

Maanmittauslaitoksen KM2-korkeusmallin kanssa yhteensopiva korkeusmalli, jossa alkuperäisiä korkeusarvoja on alennettu erityisesti virtavesikohteiden (viivamaiset sekä aluemaiset) ja tieverkoston risteyskohdissa. Alennetut korkeusarvot pyrkivät kuvaamaan virtausreittejä, kuten tierumpuja ja putkia, joita alkuperäisessä KM2:ssa ei ole. Aineisto on tuotettu yhdistämällä useita eri valtakunnan kattavia lähtöaineistoja, joita ovat - korkeusmalli KM2 (Maanmittauslaitos) - Siltojen kansien korkeudet (Syke) - Maastotietokanta (Maanmittauslaitos) - DIGIROAD-tieverkosto (Väylävirasto) - Rumpurekisteri (Väylävirasto) Lisäksi jotkin kunnat ja kaupungit ovat digitoineet Maastotietokannasta puuttuvia virtausreittejä. Korkeusarvot ovat ilmoitettu N2000-korkeusjärjestelmässä. Aineisto on avoin (lisenssi CC BY 4.0). Käyttötarkoitus: Korvaamalla KM2:n korkeusarvot uomakorjausaineiston arvoilla saadaan korkeusmalli, joka soveltuu mm. pintaveden virtauksen mallinnukseen alkuperäistä korkeusmallia paremmin. Tämä mahdollistaa esim. hulevesitulvariskien luotettavamman arvioinnin. Aineisto kuuluu SYKEn avoimiin aineistoihin (CC BY 4.0). Lähde: Syke, Maanmittauslaitos (perustuu Syken, MML:n ja Väyläviraston aineistoihin).

The data set consists of yearly maps of the start of the vegetation active period in deciduous vegetation and coniferous forest. The start of vegetation active period in deciduous vegetation (Day of Year) is defined as the day when deciduous trees unfold new leaves in spring. It is also often referred to as the green-up or greening day. The data set was derived from time series of the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) calculated from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations. The start of vegetation active period in coniferous forest (Day of Year) is defined as the day when coniferous trees start to photosynthesize in spring. The data set was derived from MODIS satellite observation of Fractional Snow Cover. The day when snow cover decreases during spring melt was used as a proxy indicator for the beginning of the start of the vegetation active period. The data set can be used of phenology analysis at regional and national scale and as input data for modelling. This SYKE’s dataset can be used according to open data license (CC BY 4.0)

This dataset contains integrated eutrophication status assessment 2011-2016. The assessment is done using the HEAT 3.0 by combining assessment unit-specific results from various indicators by three MSFD criteria groups (C1: Nutrient levels, C2: Direct effect, C3: Indirect effect). The assessment is done on HELCOM Assessment Unit level 4: HELCOM Subbasins with coastal WFD water type or water bodies. The HEAT 3.0 has been applied for open sea assessment units using HELCOM core indicators and for coastal areas using national WFD indicators. In case of Denmark, the WFD results were used directly, displaying different classification as obtained from HEAT. For more information about the methodology, see the State of the Baltic Sea report and HELCOM Eutrophication assessment manual. Attribute information: "HELCOM_ID": ID of the HELCOM Level 4 Assessment unit "Country": Country/ Opensea "level_2": Name of the HELCOM Level 2 Assessment unit "Name": Name of the HELCOM Level 4 Assessment unit "Area_km2": Area of assessment unit "C1_N": MSFD criteria 1, number of indicators used for calculating Eutrophication Ratio (ER) "C1_ER": MSFD Criteria 1, ER "C1_SCORE": MSFD Criteria 1, Confidence of ER "C2_N": MSFD Criteria 2, number of indicators used for calculating ER "C2_ER": MSFD Criteria 2, ER "C2_SCORE": MSFD Criteria 2, Confidence of ER "C3_N": MSFD Criteria 3, number of indicators used for calculating ER "C3_ER": MSFD Criteria 3, ER "C3_SCORE": Criteria 3, Confidence of ER "N": Number of criteria used for calculating overall ER "ER": Overall ER "SCORE": Status confidence "STATUS": Status classification (Good (classes 0-0.5 & 0.5-1.0), Not Good (classes 1.0-1.5, 1.5-2.0 & >2.0), Not assessed) "CONFIDENCE": Final confidence class (< 50% = low, 50-74 % = Moderate, = 75 % = High) "AULEVEL": Level of assessment units