Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

Green infrastructure development at European Union's eastern

border: Effects of road infrastructure and forest habitat loss
Per Angelstam a, *, Olha Khaulyak a, Taras Yamelynets a, b, c, Gintautas Mozgeris d,
Vladimir Naumov a, Tadeusz J. Chmielewski e, Marine Elbakidze a, Michael Manton a, f,
Bohdan Prots c, g, Sviataslau Valasiuk h
a
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Forest Sciences, School for Forest Management, Forest-Landscape-Society Network, PO Box 43, SE-
739 21 Skinnskatteberg, Sweden
b
Ivan Franko National University, Faculty of Geography, Doroshenko Street 41, 79000 Lviv, Ukraine
c
WWF Danube Carpathian Programme, Mushaka Street 42, 79000 Lviv, Ukraine
d
Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Institute of Forest Management and Wood Science, Studentu˛ 13, LT-53362 Akademija, Kauno r., Lithuania
e
University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Department of Landscape Ecology and Nature Conservation, Dobrzan
skiego St. 37, 20-262 Lublin, Poland
f
Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Institute of Forest Biology and Silviculture, Studentu˛ 13, LT-53362 Akademija, Kauno r., Lithuania
g
National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, State Museum of Natural History, 18 Teatralna Street, Lviv 79008, Ukraine
h
National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Centre of Biological Resources, Department of Wildlife Conservation, Akademicheskaya Street 27, 220072 Minsk,
Belarus

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The functionality of forest patches and networks as green infrastructure may be affected negatively both
Received 29 April 2016 by expanding road networks and forestry intensification. We assessed the effects of (1) the current and
Received in revised form planned road infrastructure, and (2) forest loss and gain, on the remaining large forest landscape massifs
3 February 2017
as green infrastructure at the EU's eastern border region in post-socialistic transition. First, habitat patch
Accepted 8 February 2017
and network functionality in 1996e98 was assessed using habitat suitability index modelling. Second,
we made expert interviews about road development with planners in 10 administrative regions in
Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. Third, forest loss and gain inside the forest massifs, and gain outside them
Keywords:
Biodiversity
during the period 2001e14 were measured. This EU cross-border region hosts four remaining forest
Ecosystem services massifs as regional green infrastructure hotspots. While Poland's road network is developing fast in
Functional habitat networks terms of new freeways, city bypasses and upgrades of road quality, in Belarus and Ukraine the focus is on
Road development maintenance of existing roads, and no new corridors. We conclude that economic support from the EU,
Forest loss and gain and thus rapid development of roads in Poland, is likely to reduce the permeability for wildlife of the
Development co-operation urban and agricultural matrix around existing forest massifs. However, the four identified forest massifs
themselves, forming the forest landscape green infrastructure at the EU's east border, were little affected
by road development plans. In contrast, forest loss inside massifs was high, especially in Ukraine. Only in
Poland forest loss was balanced by gain. Forest gain outside forest massifs was low. To conclude, pro-
active and collaborative spatial planning across different sectors and countries is needed to secure
functional forest green infrastructure as base for biodiversity conservation and human well-being.
© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

Biodiversity conservation is a contemporary challenge to a wide

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: per.angelstam@slu.se (P. Angelstam), okhaulyak@gmail.com
(O. Khaulyak), taras.yamelynets@gmail.com (T. Yamelynets), gintautas.mozgeris@
asu.lt (G. Mozgeris), vladimir.naumov@slu.se (V. Naumov), tadeusz.chmielewski@
up.lublin.pl (T.J. Chmielewski), marine.elbakidze@slu.se (M. Elbakidze), michael.
manton@slu.se (M. Manton), bohdan.prots@gmail.com (B. Prots), sviatsviat@
gmail.com (S. Valasiuk).
range of societal sectors that affect land use and land cover change.
The main vision for the conservation of forest and woodland eco-
systems’ composition, structure and function (Noss, 1990) in
Europe is linked to the concept of naturalness (Peterken, 1996). This
vision implies that natural processes operate, and are allowed to
maintain representative functional networks of different forest and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.02.017
0301-4797/© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
woodland habitats at multiple spatial scales so that species may
survive in viable populations (e.g., Angelstam et al., 2011a). Addi-
tionally, human management in pre-industrial agroforestry sys-
tems such as practised in traditional village systems (Elbakidze and
Angelstam, 2007), provide habitat for species which do not thrive
in intensively managed forest landscapes. In spite of increasing
responses to cope with biodiversity loss, the state of green infra-
structure continues to deteriorate as land use and management
pressures increase (Butchart et al., 2010). Anthropogenic alteration,
fragmentation and loss of natural forests and woodlands stand out
as key reasons behind the creation of policies aimed at biodiversity
conservation (e.g., Donald et al., 2001). From a spatial planning
point-of-view the key to biodiversity conservation is to maintain
sufficient quality, size, amount and connectivity of patches repre-
senting natural forests and cultural landscapes so that they form
functional habitat networks, also termed ecological networks (e.g.,
Jongman, 1995), or green infrastructure (European Commission,
2013). Green infrastructure emphasizes the functional inter-
connection of sufficient amounts of natural and semi-natural eco-
systems where patches of green space, protected areas, parks and
recreation sites are constituent parts. This requires land steward-
ship through territorial planning, combined with operational con-
servation, management, restoration and re-creation, to maintain
sufficient amounts of representative land cover types that exceed
evidence-based conservation targets (e.g., Groves et al., 2002;
Angelstam et al., 2011a).
In Europe the states and trends of biodiversity differ consider-
ably among regions. Generally, the intensity of natural resource use
is higher in the west than in the east (Gunst, 1989; Angelstam et al.,
2011b). As a consequence, the composition, structure and function
of natural ecosystems are more altered in Europe's west than in
Europe's east (Angelstam and Do € nz-Breuss, 2004; Puumalainen
et al., 2002, 2003). Thus, a wide range of species have better
habitat conditions outside the European Union (EU) and in new EU
member states, than in old ones (e.g., Donald et al., 2001, 2002;
Roberge et al., 2008; Edman et al., 2011; Kaczensky et al., 2012).
Large areas of functionally connected forests and woodlands (i.e.
forest landscape massifs) in mountain, wetland and authentic
cultural landscapes are still found just outside the EU in the Car-
pathian ecoregion (Borsa et al., 2009; Angelstam et al., 2013),
Belarus (Yermokhin et al., 2007) and in the Russian Federation
(Yaroshenko et al., 2001).
The expansion of the EU to the east during the period
2004e2013, which resulted in the inclusion of 10 new countries,
was associated with several efforts to encourage macro-economic
development (Cih  a
k and Fonteyne, 2009). For example, already in
1991 the Polish government signed an agreement which estab-
lished an associate relationship between the EU and Poland. A key
topic was transport infrastructure development (Churski and
Ratajczak, 2010). Transport infrastructure development is, howev-
er, likely to lead to direct consequences in terms of mortality and
barrier effects for individuals of different species (Forman and
Alexander, 1998; Hels and Buchwald, 2001), dissection and frag-
mentation of landscapes’ different land covers (Mader, 1984; Kruess
and Tscharntke, 1994), and an increased human footprint in terms
of intensified land use (e.g., Konvicka et al., 2006). Roadless and
low-traffic areas with lower levels of anthropogenic disturbances
are of special concern in Europe because of their rarity (Selva et al.,
2011). This has led to conflicts concerning road infrastructure and
forest conservation and development in Poland (Ziemin
ska and
Szulecki, 2010; Blicharska and Angelstam, 2010). As a response, a
nation-wide network of ecological corridors composed mainly of
forest and river valleys ecosystems was proposed (Je˛ drzejewski and
Ławreszuk, 2009).
The recent dynamic of forest loss inside forest massifs and gain
301
of forest outside them in Eastern Europe (e.g., Potapov et al., 2015)
are two additional factors that may both reduce and improve,
respectively, the functionality of the few remaining forest massifs
as green infrastructure. The emerging market economy in post-
socialistic countries has led to intensified logging (Kuemmerle
et al., 2006), as well as abandonment of agricultural land fol-
lowed by encroaching forest (Baumann et al., 2011). However, the
net effect on green infrastructure development is not known.
Conservation of green infrastructure thus requires knowledge
about the state and trends of both road development and forestry
trajectories on the one hand, and consequences for green infra-
structure functionality at the regional level on the other (Angelstam
et al., 2011a; Orlikowska et al., 2016). Such knowledge is funda-
mental for evidence-based integrated spatial planning approaches
(Pauleit et al., 2010; Blicharska et al., 2011; Grodzinska-Jurczak and
Cent, 2011).
The aim of this study is to assess the extent to which expanding
road infrastructure, and forest loss and gain, affect forests as green
infrastructure for biodiversity conservation and human well-being
at EU's eastern border. We focus on the cross-border region of
Poland in the EU, as well as Belarus and Ukraine outside the EU. This
region forms the core zone of a southwest-northeast gradient from
fragmented to contiguous forest landscapes on the European
continent. First, we modelled the functionality of forests as green
infrastructure for focal species with large area demands (e.g.,
Mikusin
ski and Angelstam, 2004). Second, we mapped by inter-
viewing road planners the present state of the road network and
current plans for its future development in the cross-border region
where the EU, Belarus and Ukraine meet. Third, we measured forest
loss and gain inside forest massifs, and gain outside them. To un-
derstand whether or not forest massifs as green infrastructure are
likely to be negatively affected by transport infrastructure, we
compared the existing and planned roads, as well as forest loss and
gain affecting the remaining forest massifs. We discuss the current
and potential future consequences of the interaction between
transport infrastructure and forest loss and gain developments on
the one hand, and the functionality of forests as green infrastruc-
ture on the other, and how to deal with this proactively.
2. Study system context
2.1. Policies about green infrastructure
The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy
(PEBLS) is a response to support implementation of the Convention
on Biological Diversity (Anon, 1992a). To create a Pan European
Ecological Network (PEEN) is a major project for the implementa-
tion of the PEBLS aiming at conservation and management of
species, ecosystems, habitats, and landscapes (Council of Europe,
(1996)). The EU Habitats Directive designed to protect the most
seriously threatened habitats and species across the Member States
(European Union, 1992). This legislation complements the Birds
Directive adopted in 1979 (European Union, 1979). To implement
this legislation a network of sites called Natura 2000 is being
created (Anon, 2009a). This is not restricted to nature reserves, but
based on a much broader principle of conservation and sustainable
use, where people and wildlife can live together in harmony (Anon,
2009a). The emergence of the ecosystem service concept at the
policy level resulted in green infrastructure as a tool to encourage
functional networks of natural and semi-natural areas on the
ground by spatial planning (European Commission, 2013). The
geographic location of the study area and its diverse natural and
cultural heritage make this territory one of the key zones of the Pan
European Ecological Network (Chmielewski, 1997; Yermokhin et al.,
2007).
302 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
Conservation of ecological connectivity began in Poland in the
1970s. The first spatially coherent system of protected areas was
legally established in the Polesie Lubelskie region (ca 6800 km2) in
1983. Gradually, similar systems were established in almost all
other regions of Poland (Chmielewski, 2008). In 2003 Poland
developed and adopted the National Strategy on Conservation and
Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (Anon, 2003; see also Anon, 2004a;
Chmielewski, 2004). However, this process is linked to many
problems (Chmielewski and Kolejko, 2014), and the extent to which
networks form functional green infrastructure need to be assessed.
Belarus ratified the Bern convention in 2013. Participation in
this convention will harmonize Belarus’ legislation with the prin-
ciples and norms of EU environmental legislation and develop the
Emerald network applicable to non-EU countries, which is
considered a twin to Natura 2000. The law “On Protection of
Environment” is the main legal document related to biodiversity
conservation in Belarus (Anon, 1992b). Practical activities to
implement the strategic directions in the area of nature conserva-
tion for sustainable development of Belarus are listed in the Na-
tional Strategy of Sustainable Socio-Economic Development for the
period to 2030 (Anon, 2015a).
In Ukraine the development of a national ecological network has
been prioritised under national conservation policy (Anon, 2000,
2004b). The implementation of Natura (2000) in Ukraine started
in 2007 and has already gone through major methodological and
human capacity development (Kagalo and Prots, 2012; Zingstra
et al., 2012; Prots et al., 2011). The nation-wide ecological
network legislation is in line with recommendations set by the
PEBLS (Anon, 1996a). The Ukrainian regional policy about cross-
border cooperation development defines a development strategy
for human well-being in all border regions (Anon, 2007a).
2.2. Biophysical characteristics
The study region was chosen (1) to represent a cross-border area
including countries inside and outside of the EU, (2) to include local
forest landscapes that range from those where forest has dis-
appeared, via fragmented to still contiguous forest massifs (e.g.,
Kondracki, 1998), and (3) encompass road corridors designed to
transport goods and people on both sides of the eastern EU border.
Fig. 1. Maps of the study area at EU's eastern border and the 10 administrative regions at the border between the EU Member state Poland (PL) and the non-EU states Belarus (BY)
and Ukraine (UA) in the east for which information about road infrastructure was collected. The spatial extent of the inset map is 20.33e32.92 E; 46.92e46.67 N.
We selected ten administrative regions including two in eastern
Poland, one in southern Belarus, and seven in western Ukraine
(Fig. 1, Table 1).
The potential vegetation of the lowland parts of the study area is
temperate mixed broad-leaved forest with oak (Quercus spp.),
beech (Fagus sylvatica) and hornbeam (Carpinus betula) on mesic
sites, black alder (Alnus glutinosa) on wet sites, as well as Scots pine
(Pinus sylvestris) on dry poor sites (Bohn et al., 2003). We thus
excluded regions with soils characteristic for the forest steppe re-
gion further to the east, where forest is not the natural potential
vegetation. Similarly, the Carpathian Mountains in Poland, Slovakia,
Ukraine and Romania are homogenous in terms of the potential
vegetation, with a gradual altitudinal transition from beech and fir
(Abies alba) to Norway spruce (Picea abies) forest, and to sub-alpine
vegetation (Malynovski and Kricsfalusy, 2002; Prots and Kagalo,
2012).
3. Methods
3.1. Identification of forest massifs as green infrastructure
By combining knowledge about the habitat requirements of
focal species, relevant land cover data and spatial modelling, the
functionality of ecological networks as green infrastructure can be
estimated (e.g., Store and Jokim€ aki, 2003). Sufficiently large patch
size and sufficient connectivity are two key aspects for the con-
servation of species, especially area-demanding ones with an um-
brella species function (Mikusin
ski and Angelstam, 2004; Roberge
and Angelstam, 2004). There are two kinds of connectivity: struc-
tural and functional (Taylor et al., 1993; 2006; With et al., 1997;
Crooks and Sanjayan, 2006). Structural connectivity describes
physical relations among habitat patches and does not necessarily
provide functional connectivity if corridors are not used by target
species. Functional connectivity is species-specific and increases
when a certain change in the landscape structure enhances the
degree of movement or flow of organisms.
Forests are the natural potential vegetation in the vast majority
of the study area, except at high altitude (>ca. 1800 m a.s.l.) and in
open wetlands. To identify the location of forest landscape massifs
with large and functionally connected forest patches we built a
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
Table 1
Area, human population density and road density in the 10 administrative regions in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine where interviews with road planners were made (Bordun,
2005; Leonovich, 2012; Anon, 2002, 2013, 2015b, 2016a,b,c).
Country Region Area (km2)
Poland Subcarpathian 17,845
Lublin 25,122
Belarus Brest 32,700
Ukraine Volyn 20,143
Rivne 20,100
Lviv 21,800
Ivan-Franko 13,928
Ternopil 13,800
Transcarpathian 12,777
Chernivtsi 8097
habitat suitability index model (e.g., Mikusinski and Edenius,
2006). Forest cover data were retrieved from the EFI forest data
base created using NOAA and CORINE land cover data (Schuck et al.,
2002). For each 1
1 km pixel the attribute data consist of (1) the
fraction of the pixel which is defined as deciduous or coniferous
forest, and (2) the fraction of the forest in the pixel. Because the aim
of this study is to evaluate the connectivity of habitat networks at
the regional scale, individual patches should not be fragmented. As
land cover is reduced there is a range of deterministic ecological
effects (Forman, 1995:416, Andre
n, 1997). For randomly dispersed
pixels, percolation theory predicts a critical value of 59% habitat left
(Gardner and O'Neill, 1991), above which all patches in a landscape
are connected with common edges. However, because individuals
of species can usually move across shorter distances outside their
habitat patch, a local landscape may be perceived as contiguous as
long as the proportion of habitat exceeds 40e50% (cf. Gardner and
O'Neill, 1991; With and Christ, 1995; Andre
n, 1997). Consequently,
to assure that the basic 1
1 km pixels used in the modelling
process were not fragmented, we included only pixels with at least
40% forest cover. The forest cover in each pixel was estimated by
adding the proportions of deciduous and coniferous forest in each
pixel. Only pixels representing un-fragmented forest areas were
used in further modelling. The result was expressed as a map
showing areas that satisfy virtual species requiring forest cover
>40% of forest pixels within 50
50 km windows. Examples of such
species are specialised birds and mammals with an umbrella spe-
cies function (Angelstam et al., 2004; Mikusin
ski and Angelstam,
2004). The spatial extent of core area for analyses was
20.33e32.92 E; 46.92e46.67 N.
3.2. State and development of road infrastructure
We focused on roads of regional and international importance,
which are most likely to affect the functionality of forest habitat
networks due to barrier effects, dissection, fragmentation and
increased human access to natural resources (Forman et al., 2003).
The impact of roads on the natural and semi-natural land covers
differs (Anon, 2007b; Langevelde et al., 2009; Selva et al., 2011) and
depends on: (1) the width and the type of pavement, (2) traffic
volume (Bouchard et al., 2009), and (3) position in the landscape.
Data about the contemporary road infrastructure development,
and plans for the future road development, were collected using
multiple methods. This included literature review, analyses of
official documents, and interviews (Kvale, 2007) with officials and
planners in each of the 10 administrative units in the study area.
Focusing on expert interviews (Flick, 2006) we collected data about
the current state and future planned changes of the road infra-
structure related to Polish, Belarussian and Ukrainian road infra-
structure development. Twelve interviews with civil servants in the
10 administrative regions were taken in 2010e14 in Polish, Russian
303
Population density (persons/km2) Road density (km/100 km2)
119 106
85 137
44 32
52 31
58 26
116 38
99 30
78 36
99 26
112 36
and Ukrainian, and then transcribed and translated into English.
The questions in the interview manual focused on the planning,
building and reconstruction of roads:
 What are the plans for improving the road infrastructure?
Which roads are priorities?
 Are there any plans to reconstruct existing road corridors? If so,
please specify where?
 Are there any plans to construct new road corridors? If so, please
specify where?
 Do you plan to change the width of the roads or the quality of
the pavement? If so, please specify where?
 Please specify the perspective and timeframe for realization of
planned changes.
3.3. Green and road infrastructure relationships
To estimate the road density as a proxy for pressure on the
functionality of the forest habitat network as green infrastructure,
we first compiled public digital data for roads of international,
national and regional importance for the 10 regions in the three
countries. The result was expressed as road density at three scales;
10, 100 and 1000 km2 grid cells covering the study area. Road
density was then compared with the proportion of functional forest
habitat at each scale. Second, we used the qualitative data (see
section 3.2.) to check if any planned road corridors intersected with
the forest massifs that were identified by spatial modelling.
3.4. Loss and gain of forest inside and outside green infrastructure
The spatial modelling to identify forest massifs as functional
green infrastructure was made using data from 1996 to 98. How-
ever, over time the functionality of the identified massifs that
resulted from the habitat suitability index modelling should be
negatively affected by forest loss within the massif, and potentially
positively affected in the long term by forest gain both inside the
forest massif, and outside forests in the vicinity of the massif. Given
the focus on forest as green infrastructure, loss of forest by clear-
cutting will reduce habitat network functionality. Note, however,
that gain of forest will not improve the situation short-term,
because forest naturalness (Winter, 2012) takes long a time to
develop (e.g., Esseen et al., 1997). To assess the roles of forest loss
and gain for the functionality of forest massifs as green infra-
structure for the period 2001e2014 when forestry intensification
picked up during the post-socialistic transition (Potapov et al.,
2015), we used data about forest loss and gain from Hansen et al.
(2013) within the forest mask (i.e. forest land with stands of all
ages, such as from clear-cuts to old forest) in the forest massifs.
While the forest mask is the actual forest cover, the forest massif is
304 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311

the polygon derived from spatial modelling of habitat suitability

(see section 3.1). The outputs for the study area were (1) a map (see
Fig. 6) showing the proportion of annual forest loss inside the forest
mask for each 10
10 km grid cell (i.e. an indicator of deteriorating
green infrastructure in the short term), (2) a map (see Fig. 6)
showing the proportion for each 10
10 km grid cell of annual
forest gain outside the forest mask (i.e. an indicator of potentially
expanding green infrastructure in the long term), and (3) numerical
estimates of forest loss and gain within the forest mask in each
forest massif, and forest gain outside the forest mask within a 25-
km buffer outside each of the massifs, if necessary divided by
country (see Table 2).

4. Results

4.1. Identification of forest massifs as green infrastructure

With a long history of forest loss in the three study countries,
mainly due to agricultural development, the forest cover is gener-
ally below thresholds for contiguous forest according to percolation
theory (i.e. 40e50%; Gardner and O'Neill, 1991) in Poland (30%),
Ukraine (17%) and Belarus (42%) (GFRA, 2010). Nevertheless, habitat
suitable index modelling identified four contiguous forest massifs
in the study region at EU's eastern border (Fig. 2). These were: (1)
the Carpathian Mountains in the south, (2) the Polesie Lowland
forest-wetland massif located in the borderland of southern Belarus
and northern Ukraine, (3) the Roztocze Hills in easternmost Poland,
_ Forest on the border between Belarus and
and (4) the Białowieza
Poland.
4.2. State and development of road infrastructure
4.2.1. Poland
Poland hosts transit routes linking different European regions.
The average road density within the Polish part of the study area
was 124 km/100 km2 (Fig. 3, see also Table 1). The Program of
National Roads Construction in 2008e2012 is one of the main
programs of the Transport Policy of Poland for 2007e2020 (Anon,
2007b). Within the Lublin and Sub-Carpathian regions the aim of
this program is to support economic development by creating a safe
and sustainable transport infrastructure. There is also a project to
re-build and reconstruct roads to improve road quality and safety.
This included creating an expanded network of highways with a
total length of 900 km, a network of expressways with a total
length of approximately 2100 km, strengthening of national roads,
and the construction of 54 bypasses of towns affected by high
Fig. 2. Result of habitat suitability modelling for species with large area demands in
Central Europe. The probability surface with grey to black shading shows areas with
>40% of forest pixels containing >40% forest within 50
50 km windows. Four forest
massifs were identified from south to north: the Carpathian Mountains (CM), Roztocze
Hills (RH), Polesia Lowlands (PL) and Białowieza_ Forest (BF).
transit traffic (Anon, 2014).
4.2.2. Belarus
Belarus’ westernmost Brest region hosts the most developed
road network with 32 km/100 km2 (Fig. 3, Table 1). Two main road
corridors run through the Brest region. One is the transit corridor
Berlin-Warsaw-Brest-Minsk-Moscow, which is a part of the inter-
national Crete road corridor (Parand, 2009). Another corridor
connects Brest to SW Russia and NE Ukraine. To maintain the road
network in a safe condition, maintenance works, new energy
saving technology and effective materials were used. Two road
corridors are located outside of the Białowieza_ Forest massif. The
road between Brest in Belarus and Bialystok in Poland south of the
Białowieza_ Forest massif has been subject to improvement. Aiming
at logistic support of tourism for the Białowieza_ Forest the new
bypass P47 to the east was completed in 2011. For decades a new
border crossing to Poland has been discussed, however, neither the
political nor the environmental conditions are conducive to
implementation (Chmielewski et al., 2015).
4.2.3. Ukraine
Compared to the 1940s, the total length of roads actually
decreased by about 9000 km (Anon, 1978), but since 1995 the total

Table 2
Forest loss inside and outside the forest mask within the four forest massifs identified in Fig. 2, and forest gain outside the forest mask within a 25-km buffer surrounding the
forest massifs.

Massif Country Gain and loss inside forest massifs Gain in 25-km buffer

% annual loss of forest within the % annual gain of forest within the Forest gain to loss ratio inside % annual gain of forest outside the
forest mask forest mask forest massifs forest mask

Białowieza_ Poland 0.29 0.34 1.18 0.17

Forest Belarus 0.29 0.06 0.22 0.07
Polesia Lowland Belarus 0.35 0.25 0.72 0.10
Ukraine 0.68 0.28 0.42 0.15
Russia 0.02 0.17 7.51 0.21
Roztocze Hills Poland 0.48 0.28 0.59 0.11
Ukraine NA NA NA 0.11
Carpathian Poland 0.07 0.06 0.85 0.05
Mountains Ukraine 0.48 0.10 0.21 0.06
Slovakia 0.32 0.07 0.22 0.02
Romania 0.59 0.16 0.27 0.03
Hungary 0.23 0.04 0.19 0.07
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311 305

Fig. 3. Density of all roads according to official statistics from the 10 studied regions in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine (Table 1). The location of the four identified forest massifs
forming green infrastructure is shown (see Fig. 2).

length of all roads within the Ukrainian part of the study area has
not changed much (Bordun, 2005). The average road density was
the highest in Lviv region with 38 km/100 km2, and the lowest was
in the Transcarpathian and Rivne regions (26 km/100 km2). The
average road density within the study region was 35 km/100 km2
(Table 1, Fig. 3). The strongest recent driver of road infrastructure
development in Ukraine was the hosting of the European soccer
championship “Euro 2012” organized jointly by Ukraine and
Poland. The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine approved in 2010 a
State program for the preparation and hosting of the finals of the
European Cup in Ukraine during 2012 (Anon, 2010). According to
this program the Lviv region was provided with provisions relating
to construction, reconstruction, overhaul and maintenance of
roads. Additionally, there was a strategic plan for a new highway
corridor Kiev-Lisbon across the Carpathian Mountains.

4.3. Road and green infrastructure relationship

The analysis of overlaps between the forest green infrastructure
on the one hand, and road infrastructure on the other resulted in a
clear negative pattern between road density and the proportion of
forest at landscape windows sizes of 10, 100 and 1000 km2 (Fig. 4).
Regarding road infrastructure corridors that may restrict
dispersal and movement between the large forest massifs, the
study region is crossed by three Pan-European road corridors
(Parand, 2009; Anon, 1996b) (Fig. 5). The first corridor connects
Europe and Asia through Poland via Krakow and Ukraine via Lviv
and Kyiv. The second is the Pan-European corridor which runs
through Hungary and Ukraine, crossing the Carpathian Mountains
(CM) between Chop at the Ukrainian-Hungarian border and Lviv.
Fig. 4. Forest cover in relation to road density classes at three spatial resolutions at the
EU's eastern border where Poland, Belarus and Ukraine meet. The spatial extent of the
analysed area is the same as shown in Fig. 3.
The third international road corridor connects the Baltic Sea in the
NW and Black Sea in the SE via Warsaw, Yagodyn and Kyiv. Hence,
at present the four large forest landscape massifs are not directly
threatened by road infrastructure development.
4.4. Loss and gain of forest inside and outside massifs
The study region at EU's eastern border showed large variation
306 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311

_
Fig. 5. Map showing the location of the four identified forest green infrastructure massifs (CM e Carpathian Mountains, RH e Roztocze Hills, PL - Polesie Lowlands, BF e Białowieza
Forest), the key road corridors and cities mentioned in Section 4.3, as well as the 10 studied regions in Fig. 3.

in forest loss inside the four large forest massifs, as well as gain in
their surroundings (Fig. 6). Most notable was the large difference
for the Polesie Lowlands and the Carpathian Mountains with much
higher losses in Ukraine compared to Belarus and Poland, respec-
tively. Inside the different forest massifs the highest forest loss
occurred in the Ukrainian part of Polesie lowlands (0.68%) and the
lowest in the Polish Carpathian Mountains (0.07%) (Table 2).
Regarding the Białowieza _ Forest massif, annual forest loss was
0.29% both in Poland and Belarus, but forest gain outside the forest
mask was more than 5 times higher in Poland than Belarus (0.34 vs.
0.06%). In the surrounding 25-km buffer zone forest gain was low,
but considerably higher in Poland (0.17%) than in Belarus (0.07%). In
the Polesie Lowlands forest loss was almost twice as high in
Ukraine (0.68%) compared to Belarus (0.35%). However, within this
massif the forest gain outside the forest mask was similar (0.25 vs.
0.28%). The annual forest gain in the 25-km buffer zone was
0.10e0.15%. In the Polish Roztocze Hills massif forest loss was 0.48%
and forest gain 0.28%. Forest gain in the buffer zone was the same
(0.11%) in Poland and Ukraine. Finally, forest loss in the Carpathian
Mountain massif differed 8.4-fold between Romania (0.59%) closely
followed by Ukraine (0.48%), and at the other extreme Poland
(0.07%). Forest gain outside the forest mask within the massif and in
the 25-km buffer was 0.09%, and 0.05% in the 25-km buffer. To
conclude, forest loss is decreasing the effective area of forest with

Fig. 6. Maps with 10
10 km grid cells showing the annual forest loss inside the forest mask (left) and forest gain outside the forest mask (right) based on data from Hansen et al.
(2013), both expressed as % of the grid cells. Forest massifs (see Fig. 2) are outlined in solid line and state borders in double lines.
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
reduced forest management intensity, but forest gain in the 25-km
buffer is both slow and uncertain due to long time for delivering
forest naturalness.
5. Discussion
5.1. Effects of road infrastructure on green infrastructure
Being the cradle of industrialization and development transport
infrastructure, Western Europe is highly fragmented by transport
infrastructures (Selva et al., 2011). The current road infrastructure
density clearly decreased from west to east in the study region.
While the average road density in the Polish part of the study re-
gion was 124 km/100 km2, the figures for the Belarusian and
Ukrainian parts were 32 and 35 km/100 km2, respectively. This was
inversely related to the occurrence of extensive intact forest massifs
at spatial scales of 10-, 100- and 1000-km2 to entire administrative
regions in the three countries. The expert interviews also demon-
strated that the road development plans in Poland, Belarus and
Ukraine were clearly different.
Linked to strong economic support from the EU, road density,
the length of motorways and number of city bypasses has been
increasing in Poland. The focus is on economic development;
environment is only mentioned in regards to “protection of air,
including a reduction in the impact of the energy sector” (Anon,
2012: 5, 7, 26). Until 2015 no new road corridors were planned
for the Sub-Carpathian and Lublin regions in Poland. However, in
2016, a concept from 2006 of building the Via Carpathia interna-
tional express road re-appeared (Anon, 2016d). In contrast, the
existing level of road network development in Belarus was
considered sufficient, and the focus was on improvement of the
quality of existing roads. In Ukraine during the last 20 years' slow-
down of economic and social development, accelerated by Russia's
invasion in 2014, have resulted in the absence of road network
development, and even deterioration of the state of existing roads.
The results from interviews with planners, and studies of official
plans and reports, indicate that road infrastructure development
takes place mainly in areas with urban and agricultural land covers,
and much less so in forests and woodlands. Thus, none of the large
forest landscape massifs were directly affected by any new road
development. Indirectly, however, road corridors between forest
massifs may become a barrier for dispersal of large carnivores
among the large forest massifs at EU's eastern border (Je˛ drzejewski
et al., 2005; Je˛ drzejewski and Ławreszuk, 2009). Additionally, large
infrastructure projects such as ski resorts and recreation centres,
especially near protected areas, poses a threat to the connectivity of
forest massifs in the Carpathian Mountains, and therefore need to
be evaluated against the impact on both the natural and cultural
environment (Angelstam et al., 2013).
In 2014 an EU-Ukraine Association Agreement includes provi-
sion for Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA). Such
agreements could accelerate Ukraine's economic development and
trade integration with EU. Ukraine is considered to be a trans-
portation country for electricity, gas and oil from Russia to the EU. It
is expected that transport across Carpathian region will increase,
especially if the geopolitical situations is normalised. In this case
the development of a high quality transport network will be a
priority for Ukraine, especially in transboundary areas.
5.2. Effects of forest loss and gain on green infrastructure
The Białowieza_ Forest, Polesie Lowlands, Roztocze Hills and
Carpathian Mountains forest massifs showed differed profiles of
forest loss and gain during the period 2001e14. All four massifs
host populations of area-demanding species (e.g., http://www.sco
307
pus.com/authid/detail.url?origin¼resultslist&autho
rId¼7006806287, Jedrzejewski et al., 2008), and specialists of
natural forest habitats (e.g., Bashta, 2009; Edman et al., 2011). The
Białowieza_ Forest is dominated by older forest, and the Polesie
Lowlands has a large proportion of wetland complexes. The Polesie
Lowlands had the highest rate of forest loss, which constitutes a key
threat to area-demanding forest species (e.g., Mikol
as et al., 2015).
The Roztocze Hills, as a woodland corridor across the border be-
tween Ukraine and Poland, requires maintenance of traditional
cultural woodlands (Skowronek and Furtak, 2009). Finally, the
Carpathian Mountains, host both natural forest and authentic cul-
tural landscapes (Angelstam et al., 2013). Thus, the four forest
massifs are facing individually different challenges.
In the Białowieza _ Forest massif there are two independent
Biosphere Reserves located on opposite sides of the border Polish-
Belarusian border (Agrawal, 2000). While forest loss rates were the
same in both parts of Białowieza, _ land abandonment on the Polish
side but not on the Belarusian side offers different long-term po-
tential to expanding the massif. The ratio of forest gain outside the
forest mask within the forest massif was 5.4 times higher, and in
the buffer zone 2.5 times higher, in the Polish part of Białowieza _
compared to the Belarusian part. However, at the same time recent
forest policy changes in Poland has increased forest harvesting 3-
fold in the Białowieza _ Forest. The long term net result for the
functionality of the Białowieza _ Forest massif is thus uncertain (cf.,
Blicharska and Van Herzele, 2015).
The Polesie Lowland forest massif is an ecological corridor of
Pan-European importance between Western and Eastern Europe
(Kułak and Chmielewski, 2010). The annual rates of forest loss
differed considerably between the Ukrainian (0.68%), Belarusian
(0.35%) and Russian (0.02%) parts. Forest gain values were similar
(0.1e0.21% per year), indicating similar rates of abandonment of
agricultural land. The development of two transboundary
Biosphere Reserves in this region, with management plans being
agreed upon with the neighbouring countries, can serve as an
important tool to integrate national ecological networks into a
regional one and then into the united Pan-European network
(Rybianets and Nikiforov, 2003; Chmielewski, 2005a).
The Roztocze Hills massif in Poland has several types of pro-
tected areas. In the Ukrainian part of Roztocze there is a Biosphere
Reserve (Elbakidze et al., 2013), and there are efforts to create a
bilateral Biosphere Reserve in this region (Chmielewski, 2005b).
Reduced land management intensity associated to economic tran-
sition (Baumann et al., 2011) coincides with positive development
of specialised and area-demanding species (Bashta, 2009). The rate
of forest loss inside the forest mask in the Roztocze Hills massif was
higher (0.48%) than the gain outside it (0.28). Forest gain in the
surrounding buffer was small in both Poland and Ukraine.
The Carpathian Mountains form a particularly important
regional forest massif and corridor for area-demanding focal spe-
cies (e.g., Breymeyer and Da˛ browski, 2000; Borsa et al., 2009;
Deodatus and Protsenko, 2010). However, the forest loss differed
considerably among countries. In the Ukrainian and Romanian
parts forest loss were higher (both 0.48%) compared to Poland
(0.07%). Forest gain outside the forest mask within the massifs was
low in all countries (<0.16%), and even lower outside the massif
(<0.07). The poor developed road network and absence of high-
ways in the Ukrainian Carpathians has no serious impact on large
carnivores’ migration, except when roads and railways are located
in the same valley (Deodatus and Protsenko, 2010; Huck et al.,
2010). However, Vasas et al. (2009) demonstrated that a new
planned highway corridor in the fragmented lowland forests of the
Transcarpathian region could have deleterious consequences on
forest species. Additionally, exotic invasive plant species mainly
spread along roads and rivers in the mountains (Simpson and Prots,
308 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
2012; Prots and Simpson, 2012).
Regarding forest gain, land abandonment for socio-economic
reasons in rural areas may in the long term increase connectivity
between massifs (e.g., Baumann et al., 2011). Remote sensing data
showed that 30% of the agricultural land was abandoned since 1991.
In contrast to Western Europe, abandonment was more common in
agricultural plains than in economically marginal areas near forest
massifs. However, the extent to which this forest gain could miti-
gate fragmentation is doubtful as re-forestation takes a long time,
and development of old forest much longer, and because logging
intensity is increasing (Potapov et al., 2015).
Yet another factor to be considered for the long-term conser-
vation of forest biodiversity is climate change (Gurung et al., 2009).
However, according to climate models for the temperate mixed
broad-leaved forest in Europe is predicted to remain (Hickler et al.,
2012). In contrast, Bartholy et al. (2009) predicted a significant
temperature increase in the Carpathian Mountains, considerably
exceeding the expected rate of the global warming.
5.3. Approaches to securing functional green infrastructure
At the policy level, all three countries focused on in this study
clearly aim at transport infrastructure development, sustainable
forest management and functional green infrastructure. However,
rapid economic development at EU's eastern border is enhancing
forestry intensification (Potapov et al., 2015) and loss of cultural
woodlands (Miklín and Cí zek, 2014.). This poses direct barrier ef-
fects and fragmentation, and intensified use of landscapes that
reduces naturalness (Winter, 2012). This study shows the need to
maintain connectivity within and among forest massifs by protec-
tion, management and restoration. This requires spatial planning
both within and among regions and countries.
Poland has developed an ecological network (Chmielewski,
2008), and is also part of the EU-wide network Natura 2000. The
bilateral and multilateral co-operation of Belarus with neighbour-
ing countries is mainly oriented to protect water resources of trans-
boundary rivers and setting up ecological networks on boundary
territories (Meyerovsky, 2003; Grishkova, 2003). A main aim of the
National Ecological Network Program of Ukraine for 2000e2015
(Anon, 2000) was to increase the protected area of the country's
natural landscapes to a level sufficient to preserve their biodiversity
(Anon, 1995; Deodatus and Protsenko, 2010). Also Ukraine has thus
embarked on the process of integration of the national ecological
network into the Pan-European network (Parchuk, 2004; Zingstra
et al., 2009).
However, trans-regional and trans-boundary collaboration both
in terms of planning and management practices is not coherent
because legislation and spatial planning are not effectively linked
among countries. The ecological network scheme is still a blue-
print rather conservation planning tool (Anon, 2000). There have
been several attempts towards improved transboundary coopera-
tion between Ukraine and the EU regarding the Carpathian
Mountains (Stojko, 2004; Zingstra et al., 2009; Soloviy and Keeton,
2009). The practical implementation of ecological networks is
confronted with obstacles such as the lack of funding, gaps in
existing legislation, political turmoil and limited acceptancy by land
users and stakeholders (e.g., Grodzinska-Jurczak and Cent, 2011).
Sharing experiences with other European countries that are more
advanced in this process would accelerate the development of
required expertise (Zingstra et al., 2009; Deodatus and Protsenko,
2010).
Verboom et al. (2007) showed that biodiversity is projected to
decrease until 2030 in most EU countries for all scenarios investi-
gated. To maintain the last forest massifs just outside the EU border,
and corridors among them is therefore crucial. Hence the net
effects of road infrastructure development, intensified forestry and
protected areas need to be understood. However, planners of road
infrastructure lack experience and expertise for mitigating
ecological impacts of road infrastructure and safety issues related
to wildlife crossing. Similarly, for Poland Blicharska et al. (2011)
found several gaps in the planning processes. These included
insufficient knowledge about biodiversity conservation and
participation, limited resources for planning of functional habitat
networks and collaboration, poor interaction between local and
regional planning, and weak participation. The main problem for
effective policy implementation was thus related to planners’
ability to act. Planning becomes even more complicated when more
than one country is involved.
Negative effects on habitat network functionality through
expanding transport infrastructure may be mitigated by efforts
toward de-fragmentation (Forman et al., 2003). To improve
dispersal across roads by bridges or underpasses is one option, and
increasing forest cover is another. In the Polish part of the Roztocze
Hills underpasses for animals have been built (Reszel and Gra˛dziel,
2013). To contribute to conservation of biological and landscape
diversity in Belarus the Belarusian government plans for forest
restoration on lands that can no longer be used for agriculture, as
well as on low-production lands. The plan is also to expand the
practice of protective forest plantations. Establishment of new
protected areas, their linking into an ecological network and its
subsequent integration into the all-European ecological network
has been declared an important national objective, alongside with
conservation of typical and unique landscapes (Anon, 1993).
However, implementation is hindered by limited and dispropor-
tionately allocated funding, as well as lack of coordination between
various programs, strategies and action plans. Similarly, in Ukraine
there is a plan to increase forest cover to an “optimal” level (Anon,
2009b). This offers opportunity for planned de-fragmentation of
forest habitat networks. However, according to our analyses the
rate of forest gain is far too low to have any effect.
Green infrastructure maintenance needs to consider effects
linked to transport infrastructure development, fragmentation by
forestry of remaining intact forest massifs, consequences of aban-
donment of agricultural land as well as creation of protected areas.
Hence, integrated landscape and regional planning is needed. This
requires both (1) transparent information about the states and
trends as well as policy and management pressures and responses
that affect forest habitat network functionality as green infra-
structure, and (2) effective collaboration among actors and stake-
holders across multiple spatial scales in different sectors. Spatial
modelling based on relevant land cover data, knowledge about
focus species' requirements and modelling algorithms (Store and
Jokima €ki, 2003; Angelstam et al., 2004; Fortin and Dale, 2005)
and network analysis of landscapes' patches and ecological corri-
dors (Vasas et al., 2009) are useful tools. In addition platforms for
collaborative learning among planners in several sectors are
needed, as well as public participation. However, both have proven
to be difficult for a range of reasons (e.g., Blicharska and Angelstam,
2010; Blicharska and Van Herzele, 2015, Niedziałkowski et al., 2012,
2014). The deliberation and the process of informing stakeholders
during road planning and building thus need to be better devel-
oped. This requires detailed analyses of planning processes, and
planners’ understanding of policies, their ability to act and attitudes
(e.g., Sandstro €m et al., 2006; Blicharska et al., 2011).
6. Conclusions
Economic support from the EU supports rapid development of
transport infrastructure. Nevertheless, the large forest massifs at
EU's border in Europe have so far been little affected by this. In
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
contrast, forestry intensification east of the EU has strong effects on
the forest massifs as a functional green infrastructure. There is thus
need for cross-sectoral integrated spatial planning across regions
and countries. This should be based on evidence-based transparent
knowledge about the states and trends of factors affecting transport
and green infrastructure, and cross-sectoral collaboration based on
more and better informed public participation. The governance and
management of green infrastructure for human well-being is a
concrete and suitable topic for place-based development coopera-
tion between EU and non-EU countries.
Acknowledgements
This study was made with funding from the Swedish Institute's
Visby programme to Olha Khaulyak, from the Swedish Research
Council Formas [grant number 2011-1737] to Per Angelstam and
from the Swedish Institute [grant number 10976/2013] to Marine
Elbakidze. We thank Elena Shushkova and Aleksandre Vintchevski
for valuable comments on the manuscript.
References
Agrawal, A., 2000. Adaptive management in transboundary protected areas: the
Białowieza _ National Park and Biosphere Reserve as a case study. Environ.
Conserv. 27 (04), 326e333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900000370.
Andre
n, H., 1997. Habitat fragmentation and changes in biodiversity. Ecol. Bull. 46,
171e181. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20113214.
Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Jonsson, B.-G., Roberge, J.-
M., 2011a. Protecting forest areas for biodiversity in Sweden 1991-2010: policy
implementation process and outcomes on the ground. Silva Fenn. 45 (5),
1111e1133. http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/full/sf45/sf4551111.pdf.
Angelstam, P., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Laestadius, L., Lazdinis, M., Nordberg, M.,
Patru-Stupariu, I., Smith, M., 2011b. Knowledge production and learning for
sustainable forest management: European regions as a time machine. Forestry
84 (5), 581e596. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpr048.
Angelstam, P., Do€nz-Breuss, M., 2004. Measuring forest biodiversity at the stand
scale e an evaluation of indicators in European forest history gradients. Ecol.
Bull. 51, 305e332. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20113319.

Angelstam, P., Elbakidze, M., Axelsson, R., Cupa, P., Halada, L., Molnar, Z., Patru-
Stupariu, I., Perzanowski, K., Rozylowicz, L., Standovar, T., Svoboda, M.,
To€rnblom, J., 2013. Maintaining cultural and natural biodiversity in the Carpa-
thian Mountain ecoregion: need for an integrated landscape approach. In:
Kozak, J., Ostapowicz, K., Bytnerowicz, A., Wyzga, _ B. (Eds.), Integrating Nature
and Society towards Sustainability. Springer, pp. 393e424. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-642-12725-0_28.
Angelstam, P., Roberge, J.-M., Lo ~ hmus, A., Bergmanis, M., Brazaitis, G., Do €nz-
Breuss, M., Edenius, L., Kosinski, Z., Kurlavicius, P., La rmanis, V., Lu  kins, M.,
Mikusinski, G., Ra cinskis, E., Strazds, M., Tryjanowski, P., 2004. Habitat model-
ling as a tool for landscape-scale conservation e a review of parameters for
focal forest birds. Ecol. Bull. 51, 427e453. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20113327.
Anon, 1978. Automobile Roads of Ukraine. Budivelnyk, Kyiv (in Ukrainian).
Anon, 1992a. Convention on Biological Diversity. United Nations.
Anon, 1992b. On Protection of Environment. Law of the Republic of Belarus No.
1982-XII of November 26, 1992 [Amended as of December 31, 2009].
Anon, 1993. National Red Data Book of Belarus (Minsk).
Anon, 1995. Ukrainian Law on Environmental Protection of June 25, 1995, No.1264-
XXII, VVR (Vistnik Verkhovnoi Rady [Herald of the Supreme Rada]), p. 546. No.
41. (in Ukrainian).
Anon, 1996a. The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy. In:
Nature and Environment. Council of Europe Press, pp. 1e66. No. 74.
Anon, 1996b. Guidelines Concerning the Trans-european Transport Network (TEN)
[Decision No. 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and the European
Council, of 23 July 1996 (OJ L 228 of 9 September 1996].
Anon, 2000. Law of Ukraine “On Nationwide Program of Establishment of National
Ecological Network of Ukraine for 2000-2015” of 21 September 2000 No. 1989-
III (in Ukrainian).
Anon, 2002. Plan of Spatial Development of Lublin Wojewodztwo. Bureau of Spatial
Planning. http://www.plan.lubelskie.pl (Accessed 07 July 2015).
Anon, 2003. National Strategy on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity
in Poland. http://biodiv.gdos.gov.pl/wdrazanie-konwencji/national-strategy-co
nservation-and-sustainable-use-biodivesity (Accessed 07 July 2015).
Anon, 2004a. The Natura Protection Law (Act of Nature Conservation) of 16th of
April 2004 (Polish Official Journal of Laws No. 92, Item 880).
Anon, 2004b. Law of Ukraine “On the Ecological Network of Ukraine” of 24 June,
2004, No. N 1864-IV, VVR (Vistnik Verkhovnoi Rady [Herald of the Supreme
Rada]), p. 502. No. 45. (in Ukrainian).
Anon, 2007a. European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument. Ukraine.
Country Strategy Paper. 2007-2013.
309
Anon, 2007b. Program of National Roads Construction in 2008e2012, of 25
September 2007. Cabinet of ministers, Poland.
Anon, 2009a. Natura 2000. European Commission.
Anon, 2009b. Resolution “On State Programme Forests of Ukraine
2010e2015amprdquosemicolon, of 16 September 2009 N 977. Cabinet of
Ministers, Ukraine (in Ukrainian).
Anon, 2010. Постанова Кабінету Міністрів Украïни Від 14.04.2010р. N357 Про
ЗатвердЖення ДерЖавноï цільовоï Програми Підготовки та Проведення В Украïні
Фінальноï Частини Чемпіонату Європи 2012 року З Футболу.
Anon, 2012. Information for the European Commission Concerning National ITS
Measures Envisaged for the Next Period of Five Years, in Accordance with
Article 17(2) of Directive 2010/40/EU. Ministry of Transport, Construction and
Maritime Economy, Warsaw.
Anon, 2013. Transport. Activity Results in 2012. Central Statistical Office, Warszawa.
http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus/transport_lacznosc_PLK_HTML.htm (Accessed 20
April 2016).
Anon, 2014. Program for the Construction of National Roads for Years 2014 e 2013.
The General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways, Warszw, Poland.
https://www.gddkia.gov.pl/userfiles/articles/k (Accessed 6 April 2016).
Anon, 2015a. National strategy of the republic of Belarus for sustainable socio-
economic development for the period until 2030. Econ. Bull. Res. Inst. Minis-
try Econ. Repub. Belarus 4, 6e100.
Anon, 2015b. Area and Population in the Territorial Profile in 2015. Statistical In-
formation and Elaborations. Central Statistical Office, Warszawa. Publication
available on CD-ROM and at website. www.stat.gov.pl (Accessed 20 April 2016).
Anon, 2016a. State Statistics Service of Ukraine. http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/
MULT/Dialog/statfile_c.asp (Accessed 20 April 2016).
Anon, 2016b. Demographic Statistics. National Statistical Committee of the Republic
of Belarus. http://demdata.belstat.gov.by/Regions.html (Accessed 20 April
2016).
Anon, 2016c. Belarus in Figures. Statistical Reference Book. National Statistical
Committee of the republic of Belarus, Minsk, 72pp. http://www.belstat.gov.by/e
n/ofitsialnaya-statistika/publications/statistical-publications-data-books-bulle
tins/public_compilation/index_4921/ (accessed 20 April 2016).
Anon, 2016d. Via Carpathia. http://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/a/21044/Via-Carpathia
(accessed 6 April 2016).
Bashta, A.-T., 2009. Ural Owl Strix uralensis population dynamics and range
expansion in western Ukraine. Ardea 97 (4), 483e487. http://dx.doi.org/
10.5253/078.097.0412.
Bartholy, J., Pongracz, R., Torma, C., Pieczka, I., Kardos, P., Hunyady, A., 2009. Analysis
of regional climate change modelling experiments for the Carpathian basin. Int.
J. Glob. Warming 1 (1e3), 238e252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/
IJGW.2009.027092.
Baumann, M., Kuemmerle, T., Elbakidze, M., Ozdogana, M., Radeloff, V.C.,
Keuler, N.S., Prishchepov, A.V., Kruhlov, I., Hostert, P., 2011. Patterns and drivers
of post-socialist farmland abandonment in Western Ukraine. Land Use Policy
28, 552e562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.11.003.
Blicharska, M., Angelstam, P., 2010. Conservation at risk: conflict analysis in the
Białowieza _ forest, a European biodiversity hotspot. Int. J. Biodiversity Sci.,
Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 6 (1), 68e74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
21513732.2010.520028.
Blicharska, M., Van Herzele, A., 2015. What a forest? Whose forest? Struggles over
concepts and meanings in the debate about the conservation of the Białowieza _
Forest in Poland. For. Policy Econ. 57, 22e30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.forpol.2015.04.003.
Blicharska, M., Angelstam, P., Antonson, H., Elbakidze, M., Axelsson, R., 2011. Road,
forestry and regional planners' work for biodiversity conservation and public
participation: a case study in Poland's hotspots regions. J. Environ. Plan. Manag.
54 (10), 1373e1395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.575297.
Bohn, U., Neuh€ €uslova
ausle, R., Gollub, G., Hettwer, C., Neuha
, Z., Raus, T., Schlüter, H.,
Weber, H., 2003. Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Explanatory Text
with CD-ROM. German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. Germany,
Bonn.
Bordun, O., 2005. Transport Infrastructure of Western Ukrainian Cross Border Re-
gion: Economical Geographic Research. Thesis of Ph.D. dissertation on geog-
raphy. Ivan Franko University, Lviv (in Ukrainian).
Borsa, M., Chifelea, C., Egerer, H., Gal, Z., Glowacki, W., Halas, M., Hopfgartner, V.,
Illes, I., Niewiadomski, Z., Ptacek, P., Wiederwald, D., 2009. Visions and Strate-
gies in the Carpathian Area (VASICA). Protection and Sustainable Spatial
Development of the Carpathians in a Transnational Framework. The Carpathian
Project. Druckwerker, Vienna.
Bouchard, J., Ford, A.T., Eigenbrod, F.E., Fahrig, L., 2009. Behavioral responses of
northern leopard frogs (Rana pipiens) to roads and traffic: implications for
population persistence. Ecol. Soc. 14 (2), 23. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/
vol14/iss2/art23/.
Breymeyer, A., Da˛ browski, P. (Eds.), 2000. Biosphere Reserves on Borders. National
UNESCO-MaB Committee of Poland, Warsaw, pp. 1e133.
Butchart, S.H.M., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J.P.W.,
Almond, R.E.A., Baillie, J.E.M., Bomhard, B., Brown, C., et al., 2010. Global
biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328, 1164e1168. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1126/science, 1187512.
Chmielewski, T.J. (Ed.), 1997. The Scale of Environmental Transformations and the
Ecological Policy of the Euroregion Bug. Norbertinum Publishers, Lublin, p. 342
(In Polish).
Chmielewski, T.J. (Ed.), 2004. The Problems of Organization and Functioning of a
310 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
Natura 2000 Network in Poland. Polish Academy of Sciences, Scientific Papers
of Man and Biosphere Committee, Warsaw and Lublin, p. 324 (In Polish, English
abstracts).
The monograph of the region. Polesie National Park. Lublin Voivodeship, Lublin. In:
Chmielewski, T.J. (Ed.), 2005a. The West Polesie Biosphere Reserve: Values,
Functioning, Development Perspectives, p. 206.
Chmielewski, T.J., 2005b. The Roztoczeesolska Forest Biosphere Reserve. MaB-
UNESCO Nominating Form, Lublin Province. Lublin, p. 155.
Chmielewski, T.J., 2008. Landscape and protected areas d polish experiences.
Standards and thresholds for impact assessment. Environ. Prot. Eur. Union 3
(III), 315e326.
Chmielewski, T.J., Chmielewski, Sz, Kułak, A., Michalik-Snie
zek,
_ M., Ma
slanko, W.,
2015. Landscapes of the West Polesie. Regional identity and its transformation
over last half century. Poleski Park Narodowy, Lublin and Urszulin, p. 132.
Chmielewski, T.J., Kolejko, M., 2014. Problems of protected areas network man-
agement in the aspect of ecological connectivity conservation in Poland. In:
Mirek, Z., Nikel, A. (Eds.), Nature Conservation in Poland. Polish Academy of
Sciences, Nature Conservation Committee, Kakow, pp. 49e64 (In Polish, English
summary).
Churski, P., Ratajczak, W. (Eds.), 2010. Regional Development and Regional Policy in
Poland: First Experiences and New Challenges of the European Union Mem-
bership. Polish Academy of Sciences, Committee for Spatial Economy and
Regional Planning, Warsaw, p. 576. Part 1-2.
 a
Cih
k, M., Fonteyne, W., 2009. Five Years after: European Union Membership and
Macro-financial Stability in the New Member States. International Monetary
Fund Working Paper 09/68, Washington D.C.
Council of Europe, UNEP, ECNC, 1996. Pan-european Biological and Landscape
Strategy: a Vision for Europe's Natural Heritage. Council of Europe Publishing,
Strasbourg.
Crooks, K.R., Sanjayan, M. (Eds.), 2006. Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, p. 712.
Deodatus, F.D., Protsenko, L. (Eds.), 2010. Creation of Ecological Corridors in
Ukraine. State Agency for Protected Areas of the Ministry of Environmental
Protection of Ukraine, Altenburg & Wymenga Ecological Consultants, Inter-
ecocentre Kyiv.
Donald, P.F., Green, R.E., Heath, M.F., 2001. Agricultural intensification and the
collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 25e29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1325.
Donald, P.F., Pisano, G., Rayment, M.D., Pain, D.J., 2002. The Common Agricultural
Policy, EU enlargement and the conservation of Europe's farmland birds. Agric.
Ecosyst. Environ. 89, 167e182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00244-
4.
Edman, T., Angelstam, P., Mikusinski, G., Roberge, J.-M., Sikora, A., 2011. Spatial
planning for biodiversity conservation: assessment of forest landscapes' con-
servation value using umbrella species requirements in Poland. Landsc. Urban
Plan. 102, 16e23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.03.004.
Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P., 2007. Implementing sustainable forest management in
Ukraine's Carpathian Mountains: the role of traditional village systems. For.
Ecol. Manag. 249, 28e38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.04.003.
Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P., Sandstro €m, C., Stryamets, N., Crow, S., Axelsson, R.,
Stryamets, G., Yamelynets, T., 2013. The Biosphere Reserves for conservation
and development in Ukraine? Legal recognition and establishment of the
Roztochya initiative. Environ. Conserv. 40 (2), 157e166. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1017/S0376892912000434.
Esseen, P.A., Ehnstro €m, B., Ericson, L., Sjo
€berg, K., 1997. Boreal forests. Ecol. Bull. 46,
16e47.
European Union, 1979. Council Directive 79/209/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the Con-
servation of Wild Birds.
European Union, 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Con-
servation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora.
European Commission, 2013. Green Infrastructure (GI) - Enhancing Europe's Nat-
ural Capital. COM 249, Brussels.
Flick, E., 2006. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Sage publications, London.
Forman, R.T.T., 1995. Land Mosaics. The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cam-
bridge university press.
Forman, R.T.T., Alexander, L.E., 1998. Roads and their major ecological effects. Annu.
Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29, 207e231.
Forman, R.T.T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J.A., Clevenger, A.P., Cutshall, C.D., Dale, V.H.,
et al., 2003. Road Ecology e Science and Solutions. Island Press, Washington.
Fortin, M.-J., Dale, M.B., 2005. Spatial Analysis: a Guide for Ecologists. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Gardner, R.H., O'Neill, R.V., 1991. Pattern, process, and predictability: the use of
neutral models for landscape analysis. In: Turner, M.G., Gardner, R.H. (Eds.),
Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology. Springer, pp. 289e307.
GFRA, 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment. accessed 2016-04-16 at:. http://
www.fao.org/forestry/fra/fra2010/en/.
Grishkova, N., 2003. Participation of Belarus in the Pan e European ecological
netvork creation is a basis to conserve the biodiversity in the region. In: In-
ternational Seminar “Strategies in Conservation and Use of Water Resources
and Biological Diversity in Polesie”, Pinsk, Belarus. May 29-31, 2003.
Grodzinska-Jurczak, M., Cent, J., 2011. Expansion of nature conservation areas:
problems with Natura 2000 implementation in Poland? Environ. Manag. 47 (1),
11e27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9583-2.
Groves, C.R., Jensen, D.B., Valutis, L.L., Bradford, K.H., Redford, K.H., Shaffer, M.L.,
Scott, J.M., Baumgartnder, J.V., Higgins, J.V., Beck, M.W., Anderson, M.G., 2002.
Planning for biodiversity conservation: putting conservation science into
practice. BioScience 52 (6), 499e512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-
3568(2002)052 [0499:PFBCPC]2.0.C.
Gunst, P., 1989. Agrarian systems of central and eastern Europe. In: Chirot, D. (Ed.),
The Origins of Backwardness in Eastern Europe: Economics and Politics from
the Middle Ages until the Early Twentieth Century. University of California
Press, London, pp. 53e91.
Gurung, A.B., Bokwa, A., Chełmicki, W., Elbakidze, M., Hirschmugl, M., Hostert, P.,
Ibisch, P., Kozak, J., Kuemmerle, T., Matei, E., Ostapowicz, K., Pociask-
Karteczka, J., Schmidt, L., van der Linden, S., Zebisch, M., 2009. Global change
research in the Carpathian mountain region. Mt. Res. Dev. 29 (3), 282e288.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1659/mrd.1105.
Hansen, M.C., Potapov, P.V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S.A., Tyukavina, A.,
Thau, D., Stehman, S.V., Goetz, S.J., Loveland, T.R., Kommareddy, A., Egorov, A.,
Chini, L., Justice, C.O., Townshend, J.R.G., 2013. High-resolution global maps of
21st-century forest cover change. Science 342 (15 November), 850e853. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693. Data available on-line from: http://earthe
nginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest.
Hickler, T., Vohland, K., Feehan, J., Miller, P.A., Smith, B., Costa, L., Giesecke, T.,
Fronzek, S., Carter, T.R., Cramer, W., Kühn, I., Sykes, M.T., 2012. Projecting the
future distribution of European potential natural vegetation zones with a
generalized, tree species-based dynamic vegetation model. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr.
21, 50e63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00613.x.
Hels, T., Buchwald, E., 2001. The effect of road kills on amphibian populations. Biol.
Conserv. 99, 331e340.
Huck, M., Je˛ drzejewski, W., Borowik, T., Miłosz-Cielma, M., Schmidt, K.,
Je˛ drzejewska, B., Nowak, S., Mysłajek, R., 2010. Habitat suitability, corridors and
dispersal barriers for large carnivores in Poland. Acta Theriol. 55 (2), 177e192.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4098/j.at.0001-7051.114.2009.
Jedrzejewski, W., Jedrzejewska, B., Zawadzka, B., Borowik, T., Nowak, S.,
Mysłajek, R.W., 2008. Habitat suitability model for Polish wolves based on long-
term national census. Anim. Conserv. 11 (5), 377e390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1469-1795.2008.00193.x.
Je˛ drzejewski, W., Ławreszuk, D. (Eds.), 2009. Conservation of Ecological Connec-
tivity in Poland. Polish Academy of Sciences, Mammal Research Institute,
Białowieza, _ p. 308 (In Polish).
Je˛ drzejewski, W., Nowak, S., Stachura, K., Skierczyn
ski, M., Mysłajek, R.,
Niedziałkowski, K., Je˛ drzejewska, B., Wo
jcik, J., Zalewska, H., Pilot, M., 2005.
Project of Ecological Corridors Linking Natura 2000 Sites in Poland (in Polish).
Mammals Research Institute, Polish Academy of Science, Białowieza, _ 78 pp.
Jongman, R.G.H., 1995. Nature conservation planning in Europe: developing
ecological networks. Landsc. Urban Plan. 32 (3), 169e183.
Kaczensky, P., Chapron, G., Von Arx, M., Huber, D., Andre
n, H., Linnell, J., 2012.
Status, Management and Distribution of Large Carnivores-bear, lynx, Wolf &
Wolverine in Europe. European Commission, Brussels.
Kagalo, A., Prots, B. (Eds.), 2012. Habitat Concept of Biodiversity Protection: Basic
Documents of the European Union. ZUKC, Lviv, p. 278 (In Ukrainian).
Kondracki, J., 1998. Regional Geography of Poland. The Polish Scientific Publishers,
Warsaw, p. 441 (In Polish).
Konvicka, M., Fric, Z., Benes, J., 2006. Butterfly extinctions in European states: do
socioeconomic conditions matter more than physical geography? Glob. Ecol.
Biogeogr. 15, 82e92.
Kruess, A., Tscharntke, T., 1994. Habitat fragmentation, species loss, and biological
control. Science 264, 1581e1584.
Kuemmerle, T., Radeloff, V.C., Perzanowski, K., Hostert, P., 2006. Cross-border
comparison of land cover and landscape pattern in Eastern Europe using a
hybrid classification technique. Remote Sens. Environ. 103 (4), 449e464. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2006.04.015.
Kułak, A., Chmielewski, T.J., 2010. Changes in the physiognomy of the landscape of
the West Polesie from the middle of the 19th century till the beginning of the
21st century. In: Chmielewski, T.J., Piasecki, D. (Eds.), The Future of Hydrogenic
Landscapes in European Biosphere Reserves. University of Life Sciences in
Lublin, Polesie National Park, Polish Academy of Sciences e Branch in Lublin,
National UNESCO-MaB Committee of Poland.
Kvale, S., 2007. Doing Interviews. Sage publications, London.
Langevelde, F., Dooremalen, C., Jaarsma, C.F., 2009. Traffic mortality and the role of
minor roads. J. Environ. Manag. 90, 660e667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvman.2007.09.003.
Leonovich, I., 2012. Roads of Belarus: Past, Present and Future. Forest and Wood-
working Industry. Proceedings of BSTU. No. 2, pp. 93e98.
Mader, H.J., 1984. Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biol.
Conserv. 29, 81e96.
Malynovski, K., Kricsfalusy, V., 2002. Plant Communities of the Ukrainian Carpa-
thian Highlands. Carpathian Tower, Uzhgorod, 244 pp. (in Ukrainian).
Meyerovsky, A., 2003. Problems of the belarusian Polesie's natural potential con-
servation. In: International Seminar “Strategies in Conservation and Use of
Water Resources and Biological Diversity in Polesie”, Pinsk, Belarus. May 29-31,
2003.
Miklín, J., Cí 
zek, L., 2014. Erasing a European biodiversity hot-spot: open woodlands,
veteran trees and mature forests succumb to forestry intensification, succes-
sion, and logging in a UNESCO biosphere reserve. J. Nat. Conserv. 22 (1), 35e41.
Mikola
s, M., Svitok, M., Tejkal, M., Leit~ ao, P.J., Morrissey, R.C., Svoboda, M.,
Seedre, M., Fontaine, J.B., 2015. Evaluating forest management intensity on an
umbrella species: capercaillie persistence in central Europe. For. Ecol. Manag.
354, 26e34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.07.001.
 P. Angelstam et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 193 (2017) 300e311
Mikusin
ski, G., Angelstam, P., 2004. Occurrence of mammals and birds with
different ecological characteristics in relation to forest cover in Europe e do
macroecological data make sense? Ecol. Bull. 51, 265e275.
Mikusinski, G., Edenius, L., 2006. Assessment of spatial functionality of old forest in
Sweden as habitat for virtual species. Scand. J. For. Res. 21 (Suppl. 7), 73e83.
Niedziałkowski, K., Blicharska, M., Mikusin
ski, G., Je˛ drzejewska, B., 2014. Why is it
difficult to enlarge a protected area? Ecosystem services perspective on the
conflict around the extension of the Białowieza _ National Park in Poland. Land
Use Policy 38, 314e329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.002.
Niedziałkowski, K., Paavola, J., Jedrzejewska, B., 2012. Participation and protected
areas governance: the impact of changing influence of local authorities on the
conservation of the Białowieza _ primeval forest, Poland. Ecol. Soc. 17 (1), 2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04461-170102.
Noss, R.F., 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach.
Conserv. Biol. 4, 355e364.
Orlikowska, E.H., Roberge, J.M., Blicharska, M., Mikusin
ski, G., 2016. Gaps in
ecological research on the world's largest internationally coordinated network
of protected areas: a review of Natura 2000. Biol. Conserv. 200, 216e227. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.06.015.
Parand, F., 2009. East-West: transport paradigm of international collaboration.
Comput. Model. New Technol. 13 (4), 44e47.
Parchuk, G.V., 2004. The Areas of Nature Protective Fund as Pan-European
Ecological Network Elements. Ukrainian State Forestry University Naukovy
Visnyk, pp. 46e51. No. 14.08.
Pauleit, S., Breuste, J., Qureshi, S., Sauerwein, M., 2010. Transformation of rural-
urban cultural landscapes in Europe: integrating approaches from ecological,
socio-economic and planning perspectives. Landsc. Online 20, 1e10. http://
dx.doi.org/10.3097/LO.201020.
Peterken, G., 1996. Natural Woodland: Ecology and Conservation in Northern
Temperate Regions. Cambridge University Press.
Potapov, P.V., Turubanova, S.A., Tyukavina, A., Krylov, A.M., McCarty, J.L.,
Radeloff, V.C., Hansen, M.C., 2015. Eastern Europe's forest cover dynamics from
1985 to 2012 quantified from the full Landsat archive. Remote Sens. Environ.
159, 28e43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.11.027.
Prots, B., Kagalo, A. (Eds.), 2012. Catalogue of Habitat Types of the Ukrainian Car-
pathians and Transcarpathian Lowland. Mercator, Lviv, Ukraine, 294 pp. (In
Ukrainian).
Prots, B., Kagalo, O., Mocharska, L., Danylyk, I., Tsiura, N., Resler, I., Cherniavskyy, M.,
2011. Bern Convention and Habitat Concept of Biodiversity Protection: Future
for Ukraine. Publisher ЗУКЦ, Lviv, p. 28 (In Ukrainian).
Prots, B., Simpson, M., 2012. Habitat suitability of highly invasive plants species in
Ukrainian part of the Upper Tysa basin. Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. (The Upper
Tisa River Basin) 11, 95e108.
Puumalainen, J., Kennedy, P., Folving, S., 2003. Monitoring of forest biodiversity: a
European perspective with reference to temperate and boreal forest zone.
J. Environ. Manag. 67, 5e14.
Puumalainen, J., Kennedy, P., Folving, S., Angelstam, P., Banko, G., Brandt, J.,
Caldeira, M., Estreguil, C., Garcia del Barrio, J.M., Keller, M., Ko € hl, M.,
Marchetti, M., Neville, P., Olsson, H., Parviainen, J., Pretzsch, H., Ravn, H.P.,
Ståhl, G., Tomppo, E., Uuttera, J., Watt, A., Winkler, B., Wrbka, T., 2002. Forest
biodiversity - Assessment Approaches for Europe. European Commission. Joint
Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra.
Edited by Roztocze National Park, Zwierzyniec. In: Reszel, R., Gra˛ dziel, T. (Eds.),
2013. Roztocze National Park: Nature and Human, p. 312.
Rybianets, N., Nikiforov, M., 2003. Presentation of the UNESCO Project “Develop-
ment of Transboundary East European Model of the Regional Ecological Net-
vork “Polesie: Belarus-Ukraine-Poland” and Action Plan for Integration into the
Pan e European Ecological Network”. International Seminar “Strategies in
Conservation and Use of Water Resources and Biological Diversity in Polesie”,
Pinsk, Belarus, May 29-31, 2003.
Roberge, J.-M., Angelstam, P., 2004. Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a
conservation tool. Conserv. Biol. 18 (1), 76e85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-
1739.2004.00450.x.
Roberge, J.-M., Angelstam, P., Villard, M.-A., 2008. Specialised woodpeckers and
naturalness in hemiboreal forests - deriving quantitative targets for
311
conservation planning. Biol. Conserv. 141, 997e1012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.biocon.2008.01.010.
Sandstro € m, U.G., Khakee, A., Angelstam, P., 2006. Urban comprehensive planning e
identifying barriers for the maintenance of functional habitat networks. Landsc.
Urban Plan. 75, 43e57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.11.016.
Selva, N., Kreft, S., Kati, V., Schluck, M., Jonsson, B.-G., Mihok, B., Okarma, H.,
Ibisch, P.L., 2011. Roadless and low-traffic areas as conservation targets in
Europe. Environ. Manag. 48, 865e877. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-
9751-z.
Schuck, A., Van Brusselen, J., P€ aivinen, R., H€ ame, T., Kennedy, P., Folving, S., 2002.
Compilation of a Calibrated European Forest Map Derived from NOAA-AVHRR
Data. European Forest Institute, p. 44. EFI Internal Report 13.
Simpson, M., Prots, B., 2012. Predicting the distribution of invasive plants in the
Ukrainian Carpathians under climatic change and intensification of anthropo-
genic disturbances: implications for biodiversity conservation. Environ. Con-
serv. 40 (1), 1e15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S037689291200032X.
Skowronek, E., Furtak, T., 2009. Determinants of change in the landscape of the
polish Ukrainian borderland as exemplified by rawa Roztocze. J. Borderlands
Studies 24 (2), 106e122.
Soloviy, I.P., Keeton, W.S. (Eds.), 2009. Ecological Economics and Sustainable Forest
Management: Developing a Trans-disciplinary Approach for the Carpathian
Mountains. Ukrainian National Forestry University Press, Lviv, Ukraine.
Stojko, S., 2004. Ecological and social-economical reasons of creation of bilateral
Ukrainian-Polish Biosphere reserve in the transboundary region Roztoche and
it multilateral significance. Sci. Announ. 14 (28), 12e17.
Store, R., Jokima €ki, J., 2003. A GIS-based multi-scale approach to habitat suitability
modelling. Ecol. Model. 169, 1e15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(03)
00203-5.
Taylor, P., Fahrig, L., Henein, K., Merriam, G., 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of
landscape structure. Oikos 68 (3), 571e572.
Taylor, P., Fahrig, L., With, K., 2006. Landscape connectivity: a return to the basics.
In: Crooks, K., Sanjayan, M. (Eds.), Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, pp. 29e43.
Vasas, V., Magura, T., Jordan, F., Tothmeresz, B., 2009. Graph theory in action:
evaluating planned highway tracks based on connectivity measures. Landsc.
Ecol. 24, 581e586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9346-8.
Verboom, J., Alkemade, R., Klijn, J., Metzger, M.J., Reijnen, R., 2007. Combining
biodiversity modeling with political and economic development scenarios for
25 EU countries. Ecol. Econ. 62, 267e276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ecolecon.2006.04.009.
Winter, S., 2012. Forest naturalness assessment as a component of biodiversity
monitoring and conservation management. Forestry 85 (2), 293e304. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cps004.
With, K.A., Christ, T.O., 1995. Critical threshold in species' responses to landscape
structure. Ecology 76, 2446e2459.
With, K., Gardner, R., Turner, G., 1997. Landscape connectivity and population dis-
tribution in heterogeneous environments. Oikos 78, 151e169.
Yaroshenko, A.Yu, Potapov, P.V., Turubanova, S.A., 2001. The Last Intact Forest
Landscapes of Northern European Russia. Mapping of Intact Forest Landscapes
in Northern European Russia Using High-resolution Satellite Images: Methods
and Results. Greenpeace Russia and Global Forest Watch.
Yermokhin, M., Stachura-Skierczyn
ska, K., Bobiec, A., Puhacheuski, A., Walsh, M.
(Eds.), 2007. Belarusian-polish Forest Mapping: Final Report, BirdLife European
Forest Task Force.
Ziemin
ska, J., Szulecki, K., 2010. The River that Divided a Nation: Rhetoric, Envi-
ronmental Activism and the Political Controversy over the Rospuda River Valley
in Poland. ESPRi Working Paper No. 1. Available at SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstra
ct¼1680789.
Zingstra, H., Kostiushyn, V., Prots, B., Kagalo, A., Mocharska, L., 2012. Recommen-
dations for the Implementation of the EU Habitats Directive in Ukraine: Stra-
tegic Action Plan (2012-2020). WUCC, Lviv, 60 pp. (in Ukrainian).
Zingstra, H.L., Seffer, J., Lasak, R., Guttova, A., Baltzer, M., Bouwma, I., Walters, L.J.,
Smith, B., Kitnaes, K., Predoiu, G.E., Prots, B., Sekulic, G., 2009. Towards an
Ecological Network for the Carpathians// Wageningen International. AN
Wageningen, Netherlands, p. 45.