The Future of Forestry has produced a report that describes the difference between how Sweden and Germany report protected forests.
The report shows that Sweden and Germany define protected nature in different ways. Sweden stands out with a very strict interpretation of what is considered protected. The majority of the nature reported as protected by Germany allows agriculture and forestry, while Sweden primarily reports forms of protection where agriculture and forestry are prohibited, or strictly limited.
Protection of biological diversity is an important environmental issue, but regardless of the level of ambition and which percentage target is chosen for the protection of forests and land, the reporting must be designed in a way that enables comparison between different countries. A more reasonable starting point in the debate about Swedish forestry would be to start from the official statistics which show that 26 per cent of the Swedish forest is not managed at all. Based on that, you can then discuss concrete goals with the policy, which ultimately should still be about the actual condition in the forest and land.