Untitled-9

This report, produced by the Stockholm Environment Institute in November 2000, analyzes the management system of protected areas in Estonia. It evaluates administrative performance, financial resources, and management effectiveness, while comparing the Estonian system with Finnish practices and IUCN standards. The document identifies systemic inefficiencies, funding disparities, and the need for a more unified regional management structure to support the development of the Natura 2000 network.

• The Estonian protected area management system is characterized by a lack of unified national leadership and a multi-level administrative structure, which has led to increasing disparities in the effectiveness of law implementation and the development of different protected areas.
• Protected area managers perform tasks that are significantly more extensive in practice than those defined by law, particularly regarding land reform, land exchange, and the preparation of documents to keep land in state ownership.
• There is a significant disparity in funding between protected areas managed by dedicated administrations and those managed by County Environmental Departments (CEDs), with the latter being severely underfunded and understaffed.
• Financial allocations for protected areas are often based on tradition and existing funding levels rather than on the actual quantitative and qualitative needs of the resources being managed.
• Management effectiveness in Estonian protected areas depends more on the personal qualities, motivation, and initiative of individual officials than on established legal procedures and routines.
• An assessment using the 1997 IUCN methodology showed that protected areas with local administrations and established management plans (kaitsekorralduskava) are more effective, with Matsalu LK scoring the highest at 65% of the maximum possible points.
• The report suggests transitioning toward a regional nature protection service (looduskaitseteenistus) that follows the borders of protected areas rather than administrative county borders to improve systemic management and resource use.
• In Finland, the transition to 'result-oriented management' (tulemusjuhtimine) since 1991 has shifted the focus toward visions, strategies, and team-based work, reducing organizational hierarchies and increasing accountability at the grassroots level.

APA

Peterson'}, {. '., Koitjärv'}, {. '., Ehrlich'}, {. '., Haapanen'}, {. '., & Helminen'}, {. '. (2000). Untitled-9. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4372.pdf

Chicago

Peterson'}, {'name': 'Kaja, {'name': 'Teet Koitjärv'}, {'name': 'Üllas Ehrlich'}, {'name': 'Antti Haapanen'}, and {'name': 'Matti Helminen'}. Untitled-9. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2000. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4372.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Peterson'} |first1={'name': 'Kaja |last2=Koitjärv'} |first2={'name': 'Teet |last3=Ehrlich'} |first3={'name': 'Üllas |last4=Haapanen'} |first4={'name': 'Antti |last5=Helminen'} |first5={'name': 'Matti |title=Untitled-9 |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=November 2000 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4372.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{peterson2000untitled9, author = {Peterson'\}, \{'name': 'Kaja and Koitjärv'\}, \{'name': 'Teet and Ehrlich'\}, \{'name': 'Üllas and Haapanen'\}, \{'name': 'Antti and Helminen'\}, \{'name': 'Matti}, title = {{Untitled-9}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2000}, month = nov, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4372.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }