This dataset represents the density of all IMO registered ships operating in the Baltic Sea. Density is defined as the number of ships crossing a 1 x 1km grid cell. It is based on HELCOM AIS (Automatic Identification System) data. The HELCOM AIS network hosts all the AIS signals received by the Baltic Sea States since 2005. The AIS Explorer allows to compare density maps of different ship types per month: http://maps.helcom.fi/website/AISexplorer/ The data was processed to produce density maps and traffic statistics. All scripts are available in GitHub: https://github.com/helcomsecretariat. The production of these maps have been carried out 2016-2017 through the HELCOM project on the assessment of maritime activities in the Baltic Sea. The underlying AIS data processing work has been co-financed by EU projects Baltic Scope (2015-2017 EASME/EMFF/2014/1.2.1.5) and Baltic Lines (2016-2019, Interreg Baltic Sea Region). In addition, the Ministry of the Environment of Finland supported the work with a special contribution in view of the use of the results in the HOLAS II process.

Seabed substrate 1:250 000 is one of the products produced in the EMODnet (European Marine Observation and Data network) Geology EU project. Project provided seabed geological material from the European maritime areas. The EMODnet Geology project (http://www.emodnet-geology.eu/) collects and harmonizes geological data from the European sea areas to support decision-making and sustainable marine spatial planning. The EMODnet Geology partnership has included 36 marine organizations from 30 countries. This data includes the EMODnet seabed substrate map at a scale of 1:250 000 from the Finnish marine areas. It is based on the data produced on a scale of 1:20 000 by the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK), which does not cover the whole Finnish marine area yet. The seabed substrate data will be updated with a new interpreted data on a yearly basis.The data has been harmonized and reclassified into five Folk substrate classes (mud, sandy clays, clayey sands, coarse sediments, mixed sediments) and bedrock. The data describes the seabed substrate from the uppermost 30 cm of the sediment column. The data have been generalized into a target scale (1:250 000). The smallest smallest cartographic unit within the data is 0.3 km2 (30 hectares). Further information about the EMODnet-Geology project is available on the portal (http://www.emodnet-geology.eu/). Permission (AK15246) to publish the material was obtained from the Finnish Defence Office 28.07.2014

This dataset represents the Integrated biodiversity status assessment for seals (grey seal, harbour seal and ringed seal). 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 status of the seals was assessed using four core indicators: population trends and abundance of seals, distribution of Baltic seals, nutritional status of seals, and reproductive status of seals. In the latter two only grey seals are considered for the 2018 State of the Baltic Sea report. The assessment is based on the one-out-all-out approach, i.e. the species reflecting the worst status in each assessment unit. This dataset displays the result of the integrated biodiversity status in HELCOM Assessment unit Scale 2 (Division of the Baltic Sea into 17 sub-basins). Attribute information: "HELCOM_ID" = ID of the HELCOM scale 2 assessment unit "level_2" = Name of the HELCOM scale 2 assessment unit "EcosystemC" = Ecosystem component analyzed "BQR" = Biological Quality Ratio "Conf" = Confidence of the assessment "Total_indi" = Number of indicators used "% of area assessed" = Share of the total assessed area "D1CX" = MSFD descriptor 1 criteria X "conf_D1CX" = Confidence for MSFD descriptor criteria X "Confidence" = Conifdence of the assessment ("high"/ "moderate"/ "low") "STATUS" = Status of the assessment (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))

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

The 1:250 000 data on the soft and hard areas of the seabed supplements the seabed substrate data produced by the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK) for areas for which actual survey data is unavailable. The data covers two categories; hard and soft seabed areas. The substrate types categorised as hard seabed areas cover types ranging from gravel to boulders and exposed rock, and the substrate types for soft seabed areas cover types from silt to sand. The model is based on the marine geological survey data of GTK, the substrate observations made by the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) and Metsähallitus, and on the environment variable data produced by the Finnish Inventory Programme for the Underwater Marine Environment, VELMU, particularly on depth and seabed openness models. The data has undergone statistical evaluation and the ultimate model is based on expert estimates and modelling. At its most precise, the data is at a scale of 1:250 000 and the areas with a size less than 0.3 square kilometres have been removed. The substrate type information pertaining to restricted areas has been removed from the final data. A permit (AK15246) for publishing data with a similar scale, i.e. the EMODnet data, was received from the Defence Command of the Finnish Defence Forces on 28 July 2014.

The technical harvesting potential of small-diameter trees can be defined as the maximum potential procurement volume of small-diameter trees available from the Finnish forests based on the prevailing guidelines for harvesting of energy wood. The potentials of small-diameter trees from early thinnings have been calculated for fifteen NUTS3-based Finnish regions covering the whole country (Koljonen et al. 2017). To begin with the estimation of the region-level potentials, 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). Simulated management actions for the small-tree fraction consisted of thinnings that fulfilled the following stand criteria: • mean diameter at breast height ≥ 8 cm • number of stems ≥ 1500 ha-1 • mean height < 10.5 m (in Lapland) or mean height < 12.5 m (elsewhere). Energy wood was harvested as delimbed (i.e. including the stem only) in spruce-dominated stands and peatlands and as whole trees (i.e. including stem and branches) elsewhere. When harvested as whole trees, a total of 30% of the original crown biomass was left onsite (Koistinen et al. 2016). Energy wood thinnings could be integrated with roundwood logging or carried out independently. Second, the technical energy wood potential of small trees was operationalized in MELA by maximizing the removal of thinnings in the first period. In this way, it was possible to pick out all small tree fellings simulated in the first period despite, for example, the profitability of the operation. However, a single logging event was rejected if the energy wood removal was lower than 25 m³ha-1 or the industrial roundwood removal of pine, spruce, or birch exceeded 45 m³ha-1. The potential calculated in this way contained also timber suitable for industrial roundwood. Therefore, two estimates are given: • potential of trees below 10.5 cm in breast-height diameter • potential of trees below 14.5 cm in breast-height diameter. Subsequently, the region-level potentials were spread 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. In this study, 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) and areas protected by the State Forest Enterprise. In addition, some areas in northernmost Lapland restricted by separate agreements between the State Forest Enterprise and stakeholders were left out from the final data. Furthermore, for small trees, FAWS was further constrained by the stand criteria presented above to represent similar stand conditions for small-tree harvesting as in MELA. Finally, the region-level potentials were distributed to the grid cells by weighting with MS-NFI stem wood biomasses. 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. 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.