Go to content

Active municipalities engage in actions of several types to maintain and increase carbon sinks

The differences between the Nordic countries with respect to the work on carbon sinks reflect political, geographical, and economic differences. Danish municipalities were overall more active in the work to strengthen the focus on sinks than the responding municipalities in the other countries (Fig. 1) but there is also variation in the favoured activities (Fig. 2). The strong emphasis on reforestation in Denmark is likely to reflect the very limited forested area compared to the other countries. Thus, Denmark initiated a national forest programme 2018 which demands that municipal planning processes devote, on average, minimum 20% of unbuilt areas to raising forests. All municipalities are expected to contribute to this. In Norway, the protection of wetlands and the reduction of emissions caused by land use change (this option was not included in the survey distributed in Denmark) were among the top actions. In Sweden forest and wetland protection were noted as the most common actions. In Finland, forest protection, reforestation, reducing land-use change emissions, and protection of wetlands were reported by over half of the survey respondents. In Finland the strong focus on forest protection may arise because many municipalities that own forest protect parts of them as green space. Except for increasing sinks the reduction of emission caused by land-use and land use change are also recognised in Norway and Finland (Fig. 2).
At the time of the survey (spring 2022) Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) had generated interest among Danish municipalities, in the other countries the interest was low or modest. In the Finnish survey CCS was not offered as a response alternative because there was prior knowledge that no such activities were under consideration in Finnish municipalities.
Fig. 2 The different actions that municipalities have engaged in to strengthen sinks. Note that there were some variations in the options offered to respondents. Thus, activities to “reduce emissions caused by land use change” was not offered as a response option in the Danish survey and CCS was not a response option in the Finnish survey.