During our visit to Fjarðabyggð, we learned about the afforestation efforts in Iceland. There are various issues historically and in modern day that poses as a challenge for the country to build up a sustainable carbon sink. Prior to settlement, approximately 60% of Iceland was covered with vegetation, with at least 25% covered with Birch(Lange, 2015). This protected the fragile underlying volcanic soil. However, the settlers had since disrupted this natural habitat with overgrazing of animals and using wood for fuel. Woodlands now cover less than 1% of the country’s land.
In modern days, the notion of wilderness classification, lack of funding after financial crash, and land ownership poses numerous hurdles. Looking ahead, Iceland has committed to reducing GHG emissions by 40% by 2030 than that of 1990 levels per the Paris Agreement(Pétursson, 2016). However, the Icelandic forest can only sequester 2 – 8% of GHG emissions (2016). The rate at which human development is growing is exceeding the rate of afforestation. Through analyzing the state of current afforestation strategies, I will discuss the means of afforestation meeting the needs of our generation.
In recent years, forestry in Iceland has been facing financial challenges. Leading up to the financial crash in 2008, funding for forestry in Iceland peaked in 2005. Public funding for forestry in 2013 is only half of what was provided in 2005. This resulted in a decrease of tree planting and tree nurseries going out of business(Lange, 2015). Moreover, this cut down grants for regional farm afforestation programs, which provide for 97% of funding to establish and maintain forestry on privately owned properties (2015).
Aside from financial cutbacks, there are pressures from wilderness classification that is standing in the way of afforestation. The notion of wilderness is rather popular in facing pressure from climate change, rural development, and tourism. From the figure below, IUCN has provided 6 categories to classify wilderness(IUCN, 2018).
| Ia Strict Nature Reserve | Protected areas that are strictly set aside to protect biodiversity and also possibly geological/geomorphological features, where human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values. Such protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areas for scientific research and monitoring. |
| Ib Wilderness Area | Protected areas that are usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence, without permanent or significant human habitation, which are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural condition. |
| II National Park | Large natural or near natural areas set aside to protect large-scale ecological processes, along with the complement of species and ecosystems characteristic of the area, which also provide a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities. |
| III Natural Monument or Feature | Protected areas set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological feature such as a cave or even a living feature such as an ancient grove. They are generally quite small protected areas and often have high visitor value. |
| IV Habitat/Species Management Area | Protected areas aiming to protect particular species or habitats and management reflects this priority. Many category IV protected areas will need regular, active interventions to address the requirements of particular species or to maintain habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category. |
| V Protected Landscape/ Seascape | A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values. |
| VI Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources | Protected areas that conserve ecosystems and habitats, together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. They are generally large, with most of the area in a natural condition, where a proportion is under sustainable natural resource management and where low-level non-industrial use of natural resources compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims of the area. |
This provides a guideline as to the level of human involvement in such environment. There are areas which are decided to be “pristine”, and some that advice upon resource protection. Moreover, there has been efforts from the Icelandic government such as NC-2015 to have landscapes redefined.
Although there has been a cutback on funding in the forestry industry, there are several non-governmental organizations that contribute to forestry efforts. The Icelandic forestry association, for example, comprises of 57 umbrella organizations across the country. They had been largely involved in the Land Reclamation project, which is responsible for 10-30% of tree planted in Iceland annually(Skógraektin, 2017). Moreover, organizations such as the Forest Owners Association, and forestry education at the Agricultural University of Iceland has made great strides to advocate for afforestation in the country.
After trying over 600 different species, it was apparent that the native Birchwood and Sitka Spruce were the best adapted and most suitable species for Iceland’s environment. Though there are contentions in the forestry industry regarding the dominating invasive species, the Director of Icelandic Forestry Service Þröstur Eysteinssonbelieve that it is more important to afforest the country rather than sticking to what is native (Eyesteinsson, 2018). After all, Birchwood is not meant to grow tall. Hence, it does not serve to provide a large carbon sink for Iceland. Larger species such as Sitka Spruce is proving to remedy this situation.
While forestry is recovering in Iceland, they are slowly being used sustainably as well. For example, many Birchwood is used for pizza ovens. Þröstur Eysteinsson also told us they are being used to build a pagan church. This shows that forestry is building up a carbon sink for the country, and providing cultural value for the society. However, it is clear that there is still a long way for Icelandic forest to balance carbon emissions by carbon sequestration.
Bibliography
Einarsson, Eyþór, and Hörður Kristinsson. “Vegetation Types: Major Vegetation Types in Iceland | The Icelandic Institute of Natural History.” Vegetation Types | Vegetation | Botany | The Icelandic Institute of Natural History. Accessed June 17, 2018. http://en.ni.is/botany/vegetation/vegetation-types/index.html.
Eysteinsson, Thröstur. “Forestry in a Treeless Land | Skógræktin.” Forestry in a Treeless Land | Iceland Forest Service | Skógrækt Ríkisins | Forestry in a Treeless Land | Icelandic Forest Service | Skógræktin. 2017. Accessed June 17, 2018. http://www.skogur.is/english/forestry-in-a-treeless-land/index.html.
Lange, Kerstin. “Forestry in Iceland? | Winter 2015 | Knots and Bolts.” Center for Northern Woodlands Education. January 5, 2016. Accessed June 17, 2018. https://northernwoodlands.org/knots_and_bolts/forestry-iceland.
Maa- Ja Metsätalousministeriö Follow. “Iceland’s Policy and Action Plan on Climate Change.” LinkedIn SlideShare. June 29, 2016. Accessed June 17, 2018. https://www.slideshare.net/mmmviestinta/icelands-policy-and-action-plan-on-climate-change.
