Neglected management of national parks and nature reserves

The Riksdag has decided that national parks and nature reserves shall be managed with a high level of ambition so that valuable natural environments are preserved or enhanced, and to make the areas available to visitors. Furthermore, Sweden has international commitments through its EU membership, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development.

The audit of the Swedish National Audit Office (“the Swedish NAO”) shows that management of protected areas does not fulfil the Riksdag’s goals, partly because of inadequate funding. As a result, the county administrative boards are shelving many vital measures into the future, particularly measures for outdoor recreation and more costly nature conservation measures.

The county administrative boards are also lagging behind in updating the nature reserves’ management plans. One third of the nature reserves have management plans in need of updating to enable effective management of the areas.

Furthermore, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has not provided the county administrative boards with the support they need for effective management. This includes aspects such as guidelines and IT support. Neither has the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency ensured that the management plans for national parks are up to date, with 19 out of Sweden’s 30 national parks having management plans in need of updating.

“The management of protected areas does not work effectively. In the long run, these shortcomings mean that some of the valuable environments that have been protected in our national parks and nature reserves cannot be preserved, or that they will be lost completely. It is a case of both natural areas that are valuable for biodiversity, and of people’s opportunities for outdoor recreation,” comments Auditor General Helena Lindberg.

There are also shortcomings in the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s method for allocating funds to county administrative boards, partly because important data used for distributing the funds has not been updated. There is therefore a risk of the allocation of funds not reflecting the counties’ different needs, which may lead to implemented measures not being those with the highest priority at the national level.

The Swedish NAO notes that management is impeded by the fact that the monitoring system developed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency is not fit for purpose. It is thus not possible to assess how much funding is needed to preserve conservation assets, or where existing measures are having the greatest benefit.

“Follow-up is needed to enable assessing whether the goals are being achieved and how management of protected areas needs to change. The Government has been aware that the monitoring system does not work, but has not done anything to address the problems,” explains Lena Lakso, project leader for the audit.