Kristianstad Wetlands, Sweden

Sweden (Kristianstad Wetlands)

Geographical coverage

Geographical scale of the assessment Single site
Country or countries covered Sweden
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name


Conceptual framework, methodology and scope

Assessment objectives

  1. Understanding the current ecosystem management approach - e.g. who is involved in the management of ecosystem services (locally as well as on other scales), what are stakeholders' perceptions of the wetlands, what are the ecosystem services generated, what are the threats to these and how do managers cope with these threats.

  2. Understanding the history of transformation that resulted in the current management approach. How did the management system change from a sectoral approach to an integrated landscape approach?

Mandate for the assessment

The assessment was funded by research grants (mainly FORMAS), and therefore involved the generation of new knowledge published in peer reviewed journals. The site was chosen as a result of discussions with the Ecomuseum Kristianstads Vattenrike, who were interested in participating in and facilitating the assessment process to enhance understanding of their management approach as well as the ecosystem services generated in the area.

Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)

URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted

System(s) assessed

  • Inland water
  • Cultivated/Agricultural land
  • Grassland
  • Urban

Species groups assessed

Ecosystem services/functions assessed


  • Food
  • Water


  • Air quality
  • Climate regulation
  • Moderation of extreme events
  • Regulation of water flows
  • Waste treatment
  • Maintainence of soil fertility
  • Pollination

Supporting Services/Functions

  • Nutrient cycling
  • Life cycle maintenance
  • Maintenance of genetic diversity

Cultural Services

  • Recreation and tourism
  • Aesthetic Enjoyment
  • Inspiration for culture
  • Art and design
  • Spirtual experience

Scope of assessment includes

Drivers of change in systems and services


Impacts of change in services on human well-being


Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed


Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment


Timing of the assessment

Year assessment started


Year assessment finished


If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish

Periodicity of assessment

One off

Assessment outputs



Nekoro and Sveden 2009. Ekosystemtjänstanalys i Kristianstads Vattenrike. (In Swedish)

Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)

Albaeco 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in Sweden.

Journal publications

Hahn, T., Olsson, P., Folke, C. & Johansson, K. (2006) Trust building, knowledge generation and organizational innovations: the role of a bridging organization for adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape around Kristianstad, Sweden. Human Ecology 34: 573–592

Olsson, P., Folke, C. & Hahn, T. (2004) Social-ecological transformations for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in Southern Sweden.Ecology and Society 9 (4): 2 [www document]. URL

Schultz et al. 2007. Enhancing ecosystem management throuhgh social-ecological inventories. Environmental coservation.

Training materials

Other documents/outputs

Tools and processes

Tools and approaches used in the assessment

  • Scenarios
  • Ecosystem mapping
  • Stakeholder consulation
  • Response options

Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component

Social-ecological inventory of local stewards, interviews with key informants, focus group interviews, workshops

Key stakeholder groups engaged

coordinators of ecosystem management (the Ecomuseum), policy-makers, farmers, foresters, hunters, fishing associations, nature conservation associations, bird watchers, nature school

The number of people directly involved in the assessment process


Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge

  • Resource experts (e.g. foresters etc)
  • Traditional/local knowledge
  • Citizen science

Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment

Assessment reports peer reviewed



Accessibility of data used in assessment

Policy impact

Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions

Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment


Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews

Capacity building

Capacity building needs identified during the assessment

Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity

Network and sharing experiences, Workshops

How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders

Knowledge generation

Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment

How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders

Additional relevant information