National distribution of forest connectivity for year 2006 and forest connectivity change in the period 2000-2006
Metadata
-
Temporal coverage:
- 2000-2006
-
Tags:
- connectivity/fragmentation of ecosystems , biodiversity , ecosystem , connectivity , forest , land cover changes , green infrastructure , bise , habitat fragmentation
-
Geographic coverage:
-
Methodology:
Methodology for the calculation: forest lands include Corine Land Cover (CLC) classes Broad-leaved forest (3.1.1), Coniferous forest (3.1.2) and Mixed forest (3.1.3), young plantations when 500 subjects/ha and transitional woodland when canopy closure is higher than 50 %. A forest connectivity index (Estreguil et al., 2012, 2013) is calculated per landscape units of 25 km x 25 km for forest dwelling species dispersing in average 1 km. Landscapes including woods have a varying connectivity index from above 0% (few woodlands and highly isolated) to 100% (all woods maximally connected). The pie charts show per country the proportion of landscape units in three connectivity ranges (below 30%; 30-50% ; above 50%). The change of the proportion of landscape units with forest highly connected (above 50%) is also reported per country for the period 2000-2006.
-
Units:
Proportion of landscape units per 3 forest connectivity ranges and trends of units for connectivity range >50
-
Rights:
- European Commission - Joint Research Centre
-
Owners:
- Joint Research Centre (JRC)
-
Processors:
- European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity (ETC/BD)
-
Figure type:
- Map
Additional information
How to read the map:
The proportion of landscape units per connectivity ranges is reported by country for the year 2006. The trend (medium/low increase/decrease or stable) of the proportion of units in a high connectivity range (above 50%) is given for the period 2000-2006 per country. Estonia and Lithuania, two countries with the same amount of forests (2.2 million ha), exhibit a different landscape distribution per connectivity ranges (81% of landscapes with poorly connected woodlands in Lithuania versus 51% in Estonia). In the period 2000-2006, landscapes with well-connected forest lands (connectivity above 50%) tended to increase in Lithuania but to decrease in Estonia.
Source: European Commission-Joint Research Centre (JRC); Estreguil et al., 2012
Permalinks
- Permalink to this version
- 219eb2c9d9854b6c8ca7d639ed4339ea
- Permalink to latest version
- YWXCEU9ZRP
For references, please go to https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/national-distribution-of-forest-connectivity or scan the QR code.
PDF generated on 11 Aug 2020, 10:08 AM
Document Actions
Share with others