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.

The Baltic Sea Pressure Index is a calculation of quantity and spatial distribution of potential cumulative impacts on the Baltic Sea. The BSII is based on georeferenced datasets of human activities (36 datasets), pressures (18 datasets) and ecosystem components (36 datasets), and on sensitivity estimates of ecosystem components (so-called sensitivity scores) that combine the pressure and ecosystem component layers, created in <a href="http://www.helcom.fi/helcom-at-work/projects/holas-ii" target="_blank">HOLAS II</a> project. The assessment can be applied with a focus on pressures only by using the Baltic Sea Pressure Index (BSPI) which shows the anthropogenic pressures/human activities in the defined assessment units without including ecosystem components. The BSPI however includes a weighting component in order to grade the effect of the pressures on the ecosystem in a generalized perspective. Cumulative impacts are calculated for each assessment unit (1 km2 grid cells) by summing all impacts occurring in the unit. All datasets and methodologies used in the index calculations are approved by all HELCOM Contracting Parties in review and acceptance processes. This dataset covers the time period 2011-2016. 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.

This dataset represents the Integrated biodiversity status assessment for pelagic 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. Open sea areas were assessed based on the core indicators ‘Zooplankton mean size and total stock’ and ‘Chlorophyll-a’, as well as the pre-core indicator ‘Cyanobacterial bloom index’ . Coastal areas were assessed by national indicators. This dataset displays the result of the integrated biodiversity 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" = Code of the HELCOM assessment unit "Country" = Country of coastal assessment unit/ open sea "Level2" = HELCOM sub-basins (name of the scale 2 assessment unit) "Name" = Name of the HELCOM scale 4 assessment unit "Area_km2" = Area of assessment unit "AULEVEL" = scale of the assessment unit "HID" = assessment unit ID by country "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 "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))

KUVAUS: Karttanäkymässä on 360-kuvauksen ajoreitti pistemuodossa, sekä linkki kuvauspisteen ilmakuvaan (2020) ja 360 katunäkymään (5/2021). Ajoreitin pisteaineistoa on harvennettu. Aineisto on osa Mapspace-sovellusta, jonka tuottaa Field Group. OHJE: Pääset vaihtamaan Ilma-, viisto- ja katunäkymäkuvien katselutilaa Mapspace palvelun Workspaces valikosta. KATTAVUUS: Rajatulle käyttäjäjoukolle Oskari-karttapalvelussa. PÄIVITYS: Satunnainen. KOORDINAATTIJÄRJESTELMÄ: Aineisto tallennetaan ETRS-GK24 (EPSG:3878) tasokoordinaattijärjestelmässä. GEOMETRIA: vektori (kuvaspisteet) ja rasteri (360 katunäkymä sekä ilmakuva) JULKISUUS: Aineisto on nähtävillä vain rajatulle käyttäjäjoukolle Oskari-karttapalvelussa. TIETOSUOJA: Aineistoon ei liity tietosuojakysymyksiä. AINEISTOSTA VASTAAVA TAHO: Vektorimuotoisen karttatason ylläpito ja 360-katunäkymäkuvien päivitys: Paikkatietoyksikkö, paikkatieto_tuki@tampere.fi. Mapspace-palvelun ylläpito: Field Group, tuki@fieldgeo.fi

Elevation zones is a raster dataset that visualises elevation of the terrain. The product covers the whole of Finland. There are four product versions available in which the pixel sizes are 32, 64, 128 and 512 metres. The dataset does not contain elevation values; it is a colour image that visualises the height of the terrain above sea level as zones. The sea is shown in light blue in the elevation zone. The product Elevation zones is available as a version that covers the whole country and as versions that cover a certain area. The product belongs to the open data of the National Land Survey of Finland.

The data compiles seabed remote sensing situation since the 1960s. The data includes spatial data and metadata related to each survey line, mainly based on the data produced by the Geological Survey of Finland

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.