Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020, 71–89
LAND COv ER CHANGES IN PROTECTED
AREAS OF SLOv AKIA b ETWEEN
1990 AND 2018
Michaela Žoncová
Manifestations of ongoing landscape changes in the National Park Nízke Tatry. 
M IC H A E L A Ž O N C O V Á

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.7996
UDC: 913:711.14(437.6)«1990/2018«
711.14:719(437.6)«1990/2018«
COBISS: 1.01
Michaela Žoncová
1
Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
ABSTRACT: As a country with abundant natural resources, Slovakia has legislation to protect significant
parts of nature and landscape. The paper aimed to identify the extent and nature of land cover changes
in large protected areas in Slovakia and to determine how had these changes impacted the diversity and
ecological stability of the landscape. We used the CORINE Land Cover data from 1990 and 2018 to iden-
tify landscape changes and analyzed them spatially and statistically. Overall, 21.7% of the total area was
changed. In terms of landscape changes, nine dominant sub-processes within five »land cover flows« were
identified. In terms of changes in landscape diversity and stability the most significant changes occurred
in the NP Nízke Tatry.
KEY WORDS: landscape transformation, landscape protection, national park, protected landscape areas,
CORINE Land Cover, landscape diversity, landscape stability, Slovakia
Spremembe rabe tal na zavarovanih območjih na Slovaškem med letoma 1990 in 2018
POVZETEK: Slovaška je bogata z naravnimi viri in ima zakonodajo, s katero so zavarovana pomembna
naravna območja in pokrajine. V članku avtorica proučuje obseg in vrsto sprememb rabe tal na obsežnih
zavarovanih območjih na Slovaškem ter ugotavlja, kako so te spremembe vplivale na raznolikost in ekološko
ravnovesje pokrajine. Za določanje pokrajinskih sprememb ter njihovo prostorsko in statistično analizo
je uporabila podatke CORINE Land Cover za obdobje med letoma 1990 in 2018. Spremenilo se je skupno
21,7 % celotne proučevane površine. Z vidika pokrajinskih sprememb je bilo določenih devet podprocesov
znotraj petih tipov sprememb, do največjih sprememb v raznolikosti in ekološkem ravnovesju pokrajin
pa je prišlo v Nacionalnem parku Nizke Tatre.
KLJUČNE BESEDE: pokrajinska preobrazba, varovanje pokrajin, narodni park, zavarovana pokrajinska
območja, CORINE Land Cover, pokrajinska raznolikost, ekološko ravnovesje pokrajin, Slovaška
The paper was submitted for publication on April 19
th
, 2020.
Uredništvo je prejelo prispevek 19. aprila 2020.
72
1
Matej Bel University, Department of Geography and Geology, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
michaela.zoncova@umb.sk (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1302-9772)

Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
73
1 Introduction
Slovakia has undergone significant socio-economic changes over the last three decades (namely socialism
1980–1990, postsocialism 1990–2000, EU accession 2000–2006, EU membership 2004–today), which have
also affected the land use (Pazúr and Bolliger 2017). The collapse of socialism throughout Eastern Europe was
a natural experiment of rare magnitude that affected every aspect of societies, economies and land use prac-
tices (Radeloff and Gutman 2017). This rapid transformation is the key factor of understanding landscape changes
in Central and Eastern Europe (Urbanc et al. 2004). Land use is determined by natural, socioeconomic, insti-
tutional, cultural, and legal factors (Jansen 2006). When the properties of the earth’s surface, such as biota, soil,
terrain, water, and settlement structure, are added to these factors, we speak of a land cover, which represents
the intersection of natural spatial conditions and the current land use (Lambin et al. 2000).
Changes in the protected areas of Slovakia over the given period were manifested mainly in rural areas
(Izakovičová 2012) by changes on agricultural land – extensification and abandonment of agricultural land
and the decline of traditional land management (Šebo, Kopecká 2004; Lieskovský et al. 2015). Changes in
land cover also occurred due to increased urbanization and suburbanization (Pazúr and Bolliger 2017).
In protected areas, mostly covered by forests, the changes were caused mainly by natural factors – wind
calamities and related problems with bark beetles (Sláviková and Slávik 2006).
Changes due to the increasing importance of tourism have also occurred. Recreational activities can
thus be one of the main reasons for disruptions of landscape diversity and stability and increased frag-
mentation of the landscape caused by the development of tourism may lead to a decrease in biodiversity
(Klaučo et al. 2012; Rušnák, Izsóff and Lieskovský 2017; Kňazovičová et al. 2018). Protected areas around
the world are crucial to biodiversity conservation (Margules, Pressey and Williams 2002), while land use
is a critical factor in providing food and other ecosystem services essential for human needs. The chal-
lenge is to identify management opportunities that preserve ecological functions while minimizing human
land-use constraints (DeFries et al. 2007). Land cover changes in Europe’s protected areas are a frequent
research object studied mainly using GIS technologies (e.g., Gabrovec et al. 2013; Zafar 2014; Martinez
del Castillo et al. 2015; Janík and Romportl 2018; Hamad, Kolo and Balzter 2018; Krajewski 2019; Martin
et al. 2019; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Martínez-Vega and Echavarría 2019; Ribeiro and Šmid Hribar 2019).
In Slovakia, nature and landscape protection is applied through the Act No.543/2002 Coll. on Nature
and Landscape Protection (Zákon o ochrane … 2002). The Act aims to ensure the long-term preservation
of natural balance, the protection of the diversity of conditions and forms of life, natural values and beau-
ty, the creation of conditions for sustainable use of natural resources and ecosystem services, taking into
account economic, social and cultural needs as well as regional and local conditions. The range of restric-
tions increases with the increasing degree of protection. Each type of protected area has a specific degree
of protection within its territory. In Slovakia, large and small-scale protected areas are established. A spe-
cific degree of protection is applied in different protected areas (Table 1).
The degree of protection of the territory also determines land use and the number of ecosystem ser-
vices provided. The most dominant industries in the protected areas of Slovakia are forestry, tourism, water
management, and mining. The most significant revenues also flow from these industries (Janiga et al. 2012).
Table 1: Protected areas in Slovakia according to the Act No. 543/2002 Coll. on Nature and Landscape Protection.
Type of protected area Degree of protection Number Area (ha)
Large-scale protected area National park (NP) 3
rd
9 317,889.90
Protected landscape area (PLA) 2
nd
14 522,581.50
Small-scale protected area National Nature Reserve (NNR) 4
th
, 5
th
219 84,188.97
Nature Reserve (NR) 4
th
, 5
th
217 13,347.35
Protected Area (PA) 3
rd
, 4
th
, 5
th
166 8307.54
National Nature Monument (NNM) 4
th
, 5
th
11 84,188.97
Nature Moment (NM) 4
th
, 5
th
217 1583.31
Protected Landscape Feature (PLF) 2
nd
, 3
rd
, 4
th
, 5
th
1 2.51

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
In our research, we have dealt only with the large-scale protected areas, which cover 22.65% of Slovakia.
A national park is defined as an area of over 10,000ha, predominantly with ecosystems substantially unchanged
by human activity or in a unique and natural landscape structure, constituting the most important nat-
ural heritage, in which nature protection is superior to other activities. The protection objective of a national
park is the conservation or gradual restoration of natural ecosystems, including ensuring the uninterrupted
flow of natural processes in at least three-quarters of the area of a national park. A protected landscape
area is defined as an area of over 1000 ha, with scattered ecosystems important for the conservation of bio-
diversity and ecological stability, with a characteristic landscape appearance or with specific forms of historical
settlement (Act No. 543/2002 Coll. on Nature and Landscape Protection) (Zákon o ochrane … 2002). These
areas thus constitute representative parts of the landscape that need to be protected by law and focus on
their excellent management. Although the legislation protects a large part of the landscape, the protect-
ed areas are subject not only to anthropogenic influences but also to various natural disturbances. Protected
areas are the cornerstone of forest protection, but during socio-economic and institutional crises, the pro-
tection of forests is not always adequate. Since 1990, Slovakia has undergone economic-institutional changes,
including the break-up of socialism, accession to the European Union, and the rapid expansion of protected
areas (Butsic et al. 2017). 
It is very important to detect and analyze changes in protected areas, because they are not immune to
biodiversity and habitat loss or increases in human-caused pressure (Geldmann, Joppa and Burgess 2014).
The paper aims to compare and evaluate the extent and the nature of land cover changes in protect-
ed areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018. Based on the research, we should be able to answer the following
research questions:
• What was the extent of changes that took place in selected protected areas of Slovakia?
• What changes took place in protected areas of Slovakia?
• Which land cover classes were dynamic and which were static in protected areas?
• How did the landscape’s diversity and stability of protected areas change in the last three decades?
2 Methods
2.1 Study area
In our research, we have dealt with landscape changes in large-scale protected areas of Slovakia, which
include nine national parks and fourteen protected landscape areas (Figure 1).
The oldest protected landscape area is the PLA Vihorlat, which was declared in 1973. All PLAs were
established until 1990, except for the PLA Dunajské Luhy, which was established only in 1998 and is the
youngest protected area in Slovakia. Some of the present national parks were firstly protected as protect-
ed landscape areas and had been transformed into national parks later (1964 – Slovenský raj, 1967 – Malá
Fatra, 1973 – Slovenský Kras, 1974 – Veľká Fatra, 1977 – Muránska Planina). The oldest national park is
the Tatra National Park (TANAP), which was proclaimed in 1948. This year was significant for the for-
mer Czechoslovakia, as it had been listed as the 49
th
state in the list of states that established national parks
on their territory (Štátny zoznam osobitne … 2020). Some protected areas have changed their boundaries
and area over time. In our research, we have observed areas delimited by their current borders. 
2.2 Data and analyses
We have used CORINE Land Cover (CLC) data from 1990 and 2018 for the analysis of land cover changes
in protected areas. Using analytical tools in ArcMap 10.5 software, we had been able to identify the extent
and the nature of changes over a nearly 30-year period. Twenty-six CLC classes have been identified in
large-scale protected areas of Slovakia (Table 2).
We have focused mainly on the comparative evaluation of changes in the individual land cover class-
es and analyzed them statistically and spatially. The output tables were subsequently transformed into
contingency tables, from which we have obtained the proportional shares of land cover classes in 1990 and
74
Figure 1: Large-scale protected areas in Slovakia (National park – NP , Protected landscape area – PLA).p

Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
75
11
7
23
5
9
4
1
17
21
6
8
18
10
19
2
13
15
20
16
14
12
3
22
1 PLA Biele Karpaty
2 PLA Cerová vrchovina
3 PLA Dunajské luhy
4 PLA Horná Orava
5 PLA Kysuce
6 PLA Latorica
7 PLA Malé Karpaty
8 PLA Poľana
9 PLA Ponitrie
10 PLA Strážovské vrchy
11 PLA Štiavnické vrchy
12 PLA Vihorlat
13 PLA Východné Karpaty
14 PLA Záhorie
15 NP Malá Fatra
16 NP Muránska planina
17 NP Nízke Tatry
18 NP Poloniny
19 NP Slovenský kras
20 NP Slovenský raj
21 NP Veľká Fatra
22 NP Pieniny
23 NP Tatra
0 20 40 60
km
CZECHIA
POLAND
HUNGARY
UKRAINE
AUSTRIA
Scale: 1 : 2,200,000
Content by: Michaela Žoncová
Map by: Michaela Žoncová
Source: Slovak environment agency 
© 2020, Department of Geography and Geology
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
Large–scale protected areas of Slovakia

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
76
2018 as well as the changes within the period observed. The next stage consisted of assessing landscape
structure changes based on the calculation of landscape metrics using the Patch Analyst extension. The soft-
ware offers analyses of several types of landscape-ecological indices. These metrics are often used as indicators
of landscape fragmentation or diversity in Slovakia (Boltižiar 2010; Gajdoš, Klaučo and Škodová 2012; Olahová,
Vojtek and Boltižiar 2013) and abroad (Li et al. 2004; Kumar et al. 2018; Deriaz et al. 2019). However, in
our research we have focused mainly on the analysis of landscape diversity over time using the Shannon
Diversity Index (SDI). It is an index determining landscape diversity calculated as the ratio of the size of
different land cover classes over the total area. SDI increases by the number of patches in the land cover
classes. The higher the index value, the greater the diversity of the land cover, i.e., the land cover is richer
in the number of land cover classes and the number of patches (Klaučo et al. 2014). The index will be equal
to 0 when there is only one patch in the landscape, and increases as the number of patch types or the pro-
portional distribution of patch types increases. We analysed the landscape stability using the Ecological
Stability coefficient (ESc), according to Míchal (1982). The coefficient reflects the proportion of relatively
stable and unstable landscape areas. Stable areas include forests, non-forest tree vegetation, meadows, pas-
tures (we have included CLC classes: 221, 222, 231, 311, 312, 313, 321, 322, 324, 331, 332, 333, 411, 412,
511, 512). Unstable areas include arable and built-up areas (we have included CLC classes: 112, 121, 131,
132, 133, 141, 412, 211, 242, 243). We have observed the values of the coefficient as well as their change
between the years 1990 and 2018. The resulting values were interpreted as follows:
• ESc < 0.10 – an area with a maximal disruption of natural structures, essential ecological functions must
be intensively and permanently replaced by technical interventions;
• ESc = 0.10–0.30 – an over-exploited area, with an apparent disruption of natural structures;
Table 2: CLC classes in large-scale protected areas of Slovakia.
Level 1 Level 3
1 Artificial surfaces 112 Discontinuous urban fabric
121 Industrial or commercial units
131 Mineral extraction sites
132 Dumpsites
133 Construction sites
141 Green urban areas 
142 Sport and leisure facilities
2 Agricultural areas 211 Non-irrigated arable land
221 Vineyards
222 Fruit trees and berry plantations
231 Pastures
242 Complex cultivation patterns
243 Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation
3 Forest and semi-natural areas 311 Broad-leaved forest
312 Coniferous forest
313 Mixed forest
321 Natural grasslands
322 Moors and heathland
324 Transitional woodland-shrub
331 Beaches, dunes, sands
332 Bare rocks
333 Sparsely vegetated areas
4 Wetlands 411 Inland marshes
412 Peat bogs
5 Water bodies 511 Watercourses
512 Waterbodies

• ESc = 0.31–1.00 – an intensively used area, mainly for large-scale agricultural production, where weak-
ening of self-regulatory processes causes their considerable ecological lability;
• ESc > 1,00 – an almost balanced landscape in which the technical objects are in relative balance with the
preserved natural structures.
Within the framework of land cover structure changes between 1990 and 2018, we have also identified
the dominant (not the prevailing) process using the »land cover flows« (LCF) identification method. Some
authors (Stott and Haines-Y oung 1998; Feranec et al. 2010; Perdigao and Christensen 2000; Köhler, Olschofsky
and Gerard 2006) have used this method, but they defined different types of processes. In our research, we
used a land cover flow definition by Haines-Y oung and Weber (2006). They identified nine types of processes:
• LCF1 Urban land management – Internal transformation of urban areas;
• LCF2 Urban residential sprawl – Land uptake by residential buildings altogether with associated ser-
vices and urban infrastructure from non-urban land;
• LCF3 Sprawl of economic sites and infrastructures – Land uptake by new economic sites and infra-
structures (including sport and leisure facilities) from non-urban land;
• LCF4 Agriculture internal conversions – Conversion between farming types;
• LCF5 Conversion from forested & natural land to agriculture – Agricultural expansion;
• LCF6 Withdrawal of farming – Farmland abandonment and other conversions from agriculture activ-
ity in favor of forests or natural land;
• LCF7 Forests creation and management – Creation of forests and management of the forest territory
by felling and replanting;
• LCF8 Water bodies creation and management – Creation of dams and reservoirs and possible conse-
quences of the management of the water resource on the water surface area;
Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
77
×
CLS
classes
Year 2018 
112 121 131 .....
Year 1990
112 x7 , 23 , 50 , 0
121 25,6 x 0,5 1,5
131 0,0 x 5,2
..... 1,2 3,2 0,0 x
ÿ
=
INPUT
DATA
SOFTWARE
RESEARCH
TOPIC
METHODS
CLC 1990 CLC 2018
Polygons of protected
areas of Slovakia 
ArcGIS 10.5
PatchAnalyst
MS Excel
Extent of land
cover changes
Nature of land
cover changes
Diversity and stability
of landscape
Land cover
change index
Cross–table matrix
of land cover changes
Shannon diversity index SDI
Ecological stability coe!cient ESc
ESc
Identi cation
of dominant change and its
classi cation according to
Land Cover Flow
methodology (Haines-Young
and Weber 2006)
 
 
Changed
area (ha)
Total
area (ha)
100 (%)
Stable land cover
classes (ha)
Unstable land cover
classes (ha)
42,6
SDI =1
1
−
∑
=
N
*
Figure 2: Schematically representation of the methodology followed by the research.

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
78
• LCF9 Changes of land cover due to natural and multiple causes – Changes in land cover resulting
from natural phenomena with or without any human influence.
Additionally, Haines-Y oung and Weber (2006) defined sub-processes at detailed level. For complete
list of sub-processes see Haines-Y oung and W eber (2006). W e have identified the most dominant sub-process,
i.e., the one with the highest proportional share in each protected area. We have focused on the figure with
the highest numerical value, that is to say, which class of land cover was dominantly changing to anoth-
er class, using the cross table matrix of the changes in the different land cover classes in the observed period.
We have then assigned this change to a specific land cover flow. Although we could have assigned other
sub-processes in the observed area (e.g., LCF71 includes changes from CLC 324 to CLC 311, CLC 324 to
CLC 312, CLC 324 to CLC 313, and other), we have not deliberately addressed all the sub-processes, but
only the most dominant sub-process (Figure 2). 
3 Results
3.1 The extent of land cover changes
We could determine the extent of land cover changes by comparing the CLC data from 1990 and 2018 in
each of the protected areas (Figure 3). 
01 02 03 04 05 0
NP Pieniny
NP Tatra
NP Veľká Fatra
NP Slovenský raj
NP Slovenský Kras
NP Poloniny
NP Nízke Tatry
NP Muránska Planina
NP Malá Fatra
PLA Záhorie
PLA Východné Karpaty
PLA Vihorlat
PLA Štiavnické vrchy
PLA Strážovské vrchy
PLA Ponitrie
PLA Poľana
PLA Malé Karpaty
PLA Latorica
PLA Kysuce
PLA Horná Orava
PLA Dunajské Luhy
PLA Cerová vrchovina
PLA Biele Karpaty
Total change (%)
Figure 3: Extent of changes in large protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018.
Figure 4: Land cover changes in large-scale protected areas in Slovakia between 1990 and 2018 (in %).p

Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
79
Land cover change (%)
< 15.0
15.1–20.0
20.1–25.0
25.1–30.0
< 30.1
0 40 80 120
km
Scale: 1 : 2,200,000
Content by: Michaela Žoncová
Map by: Michaela Žoncová
Source: Corine land cover data 
© 2020, Department of Geography and Geology,
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
80
Table 3: The nature of land cover changes in large protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018 (x – no change observed).
Protected area
PLA Biele Karpaty
PLA Cerová vrchovina
PLA Dunajské Luhy
PLA Horná Orava
PLA Kysuce
PLA Latorica
PLA Malé Karpaty
PLA Poľana
PLA Ponitrie
PLA Strážovské vrchy
PLA Štiavnické vrchy
PLA Vihorlat
PLA Východné Karpaty
PLA Záhorie
NP Malá Fatra
NP Muránska planina
NP Nízke Tatry
NP Poloniny
NP Slovenský Kras
NP Slovenský Raj
NP Veľká Fatra
NP Pieniny
Tatra NP
512
x
–1%
8%
6%
1%
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
2%
x
1%
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
511
x
x
4%
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
5%
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
412
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
411
x
x
–5%
–7%
x
5%
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
333
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
–2%
–1%
<0.5%
x
2%
–1%
1%
x
<0.5%
332
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
–1%
331
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
324
–5%
–7%
–44%
–12%
27%
–4%
–18%
–25%
–9%
3%
–5%
–16%
–52%
–10%
5%
–8%
42%
–35%
11%
17%
8%
1%
48%
322
x
x
x
1%
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
2%
x
4%
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
5%
321
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
–2%
x
x
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
x
–8%
x
–9%
x
<0.5%
x
–5%
x
–7%
313
–1%
7%
x
10%
16%
x
–4%
58%
29%
10%
6%
8%
21%
11%
23%
36%
11%
27%
21%
9%
19%
11%
1%
312
–1%
1%
x
11%
–27%
x
7%
–9%
3%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
4%
7%
–9%
–17%
–45%
<0.5%
–1%
–23%
–26%
17%
–44%
In total, up to 21.7% of the area of the protected areas was changed. Land cover, and consequently the
landscape, changed in the national parks as well as in the protected landscape areas. More than one third
of the area was changed in the PLAs Dunajské luhy (41.3%) and Kysuce (37.6%). On the contrary, the least
changes occurred in the PLAs Vihorlat (10.7%) and Cerová vrchovina (12.2%). Considering the nation-
al parks, the NP Nízke Tatry has changed the most, where up to 26.3% of its area has changed. On the contrary,
the least changes were recorded in the NP Malá Fatra, where only 12.8% of the area has changed. In terms
of spatial distribution, most changes occurred in protected areas located along the country’s borders with
one exceptions in the centre of the country in the Low Tatras National Park (Figure 4). 
The most significant changes thus took place within CLC classes 231, 243, 311, 312, 313, 324, i.e., with-
in forest stands and meadows. These classes can be considered very dynamic, with more than 20% decrease
or increase in their areal extent. On the contrary, CLC classes 112, 121, 131, 132, 141, 142, 221, 222, 331,
332, 333, 412, i.e., urbanized areas, areas of permanent crops, areas with sparse vegetation and wetlands,
can be described as static classes.
3.2 The nature of land cover changes
By comparing the percentage shares of land cover classes of protected areas in individual years, it is pos-
sible to define the nature of the main changes (Table 3).
The most significant increase in land cover class was recorded in the PLA Poľana, where up to 58%
of the area was transformed into mixed forests (CLC 313). In particular, the forest land cover classes (CLCs
311, 312, 324) and agricultural land cover classes (CLC 211, 231, 243) were transformed. On the other hand,
the most substantial proportional decrease occurred in the PLA Východné Karpaty, where the area of tran-

Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
81
311
15%
26%
52%
6%
1%
34%
22%
–13%
–17%
–5%
12%
11%
42%
–6%
–6%
1%
–1%
26%
<0.5%
10%
10%
<0.5%
<0.5%
243
–8%
–6%
–6%
–7%
–4%
–4%
<0.5%
–2%
–1%
–4%
–13%
–2%
–7%
–4%
–3%
1%
<0.5%
–7%
–5%
2%
<0.5%
–22%
<0.5%
242
2%
<0.5%
<0.5%
12%
4%
–1%
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
–1%
<0.5%
1%
<0.5%
<0.5%
2%
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
231
1%
–19%
3%
–11%
–18%
–15%
–1%
–9%
–2%
–5%
1%
–2%
–7%
8%
–5%
–11%
–3%
–11%
–25%
–14%
–6%
–7%
–2%
222
<0.5%
x
–1%
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
221
x
–1%
x
x
x
<0.5%
–1%
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
–1%
x
x
x
x
211
–4%
3%
1%
–9%
–1%
–14%
–3%
–1%
–4%
1%
–1%
–2%
–1%
–12%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
–2%
–1%
<0.5%
1%
<0.5%
142
<0.5%
x
1%
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
1%
x
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
1%
x
x
–1%
–1%
x
<0.5%
141
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
133
x
x
–12%
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
132
x
x
–1%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
131
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
121
x
x
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
2%
x
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
x
x
<0.5%
x
x
x
x
112
2%
–2%
<0.5%
<0.5%
1%
–1%
<0.5%
x
<0.5%
1%
<0.5%
–1%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
sitional woodland-shrub was transformed into deciduous and mixed forests. Both cases, correspond to
succession processes, where over-harvested or degraded forest areas have overgrown over time and have
been transformed into young forests. However, it does not have to be just a succession. Artificial reforestation
is mainly used in habitats where the natural regeneration is slowed down, i.e. if the mother stand is miss-
ing or has an unsuitable species composition or poor quality, or on large calamitous areas. Artificial regeneration
is often a tool to ensure the continuity of the forest in larger and more continuous calamitous areas. An oblig-
ation to afforest any clearing within two years from its origin, three years if protective forest stands are
concerned, comes from the Act No. 326/2005 Coll. on forests (Zákon o lesoch 2005). The state authori-
ties may extend this period by another two years in case of an expected natural renewal. Another obligation
is to secure the forest stand from 2 to 10 years after the end of the afforestation period.
The same process, when the share of transitional woodland-shrub (CLC 324) decreases at the expense
of forest land cover classes is also visible in the PLAs Dunajské luhy, Poloniny, and Poľana. Succession process-
es are also reflected by the increase of permanent grasslands in the NP Slovenský kras. The opposite process,
when the share of transitional woodland-shrub increases and the share of forest decreases, was recorded
in the PLA Kysuce, the NPs Nízke Tatry, Slovenský raj and Tatra. Transitional woodland-shrub is a class
which contains young forest trees (deciduous and coniferous), planted after loggings or various calamities,
as well as forest nurseries, forest formations with natural development, shrub formations on abandoned mead-
ows, pastures and forest clearings under high-voltage power lines (Feranec and Oťaheľ 2001). Due to the
loss of forest cover, this landscape ceased to fulfill its essential functions. Consequently, the ecological sta-
bility of the landscape is disrupted, which is manifested in various disturbances, including landslides, floods,
and endangering of wild animals by the reduction of their natural habitats. The most significant change
in the urbanized (built-up) areas was observed in the PLA Dunajské Luhy. However, it is necessary to note
Continuation of table 3.

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
that this area was not been categorized as a PLA in 1990. The construction of the Gabčíkovo waterworks
was carried out in this area in the 1980s and 1990s. However, the system of aggradation embankments
and accumulation depressions with a dense network of river distributaries was created before human inter-
ventions into the natural hydrological regime of the Danube River. The Dunajské Luhy was declared as
Protected Landscape Area only in 1998, and the formerly built-up areas are nowadays mainly water bod-
ies, permanent grasslands, agricultural areas, or deciduous forests (Feranec et al. 2002).
We have focused on the identification of processes taking place in the landscape within the dynam-
ics of land cover classes, the so-called »land cover flows«. We have identified the dominant sub-processes
based on the percentage of all changes in every protected area, i.e., the process with the highest percent-
age (Table 4). 
Nine dominant sub-processes, which can be assigned to five land cover flows, have been identified
(Figure 5).
LCF71 – is the most frequent dominant sub-process in Slovakian large protected areas. It represents
the conversion of transitional woodland-shrubs to forests, i.e., the secondary succession on forest clear-
ings. This sub-process was dominant in eight protected areas. Altogether three types of changes were observed:
Transitional woodland-shrubs were dominantly transformed into deciduous forests in the PLAs Malé Karpaty
(29.54%), Dunajské luhy (40.15%), Vihorlat (39.89%), Východné Karpaty (40.74%), and the NP Poloniny
(37.98%). The transformation of transitional woodland-shrubs into coniferous forests was most evident
in the PLAs Horná Orava (14.96%) and Záhorie (10.72%), and transformation to mixed forests was most
evident in the PLA Poľana (28.49%).
LCF73 – represents the internal transformations of forests, i.e., conversions of one forest type to anoth-
er (among coniferous, deciduous and mixed). Overall, two types of changes have been identified, when
mixed forests were converted to deciduous forests and vice versa. These sub-processes were identified in
five protected areas, most notably in the NP Malá Fatra. Specifically, this involved the conversion of CLC
311 to CLC 313. Conversion of deciduous forests to mixed forests was also dominant in the PLAs Ponitrie
(29.15%) and Strážovské vrchy (17.06%) and the NP Slovenský kras (16.36%). 
LCF74 – the sub-process is most often caused by forest loggings or by natural forces resulting in sub-
sequent logging. Only one sub-process was identified in the large protected areas, namely the transformation
of coniferous forest into transitional woodland-shrub. This sub-process can also be described as a »tran-
sient state of the forest« and has been dominant in one PLA – PLA Kysuce and in five national parks –
the Tatra NP , NP Nízke Tatry, NP Slovenský raj, NP Muránska planina and NP Veľká Fatra. The sub-process
82
Table 4: Dominant land cover flows in large protected areas.
Large protected area Dominant LCF Large protected area Dominant LCF
% LCF % LCF
PLA Biele Karpaty 16.12 LCF73 PLA Východné Karpaty 40.74 LCF71
PLA Cerová vrchovina 17.79 LCF61 PLA Záhorie 10.72 LCF71
PLA Dunajské Luhy 40.15 LCF71 NP Malá Fatra 32.54 LCF73
PLA Horná Orava 14.96 LCF71 NP Muránska planina 17.59 LCF74
PLA Kysuce 31.18 LCF74 NP Nízke Tatry 52.59 LCF74
PLA Latorica 14.62 LCF61 NP Poloniny 37.98 LCF71
PLA Malé Karpaty 29.54 LCF71 NP Slovenský kras 16.36 LCF73
PLA Poľana 28.49 LCF71 NP Slovenský raj 43.42 LCF74
PLA Ponitrie 29.15 LCF73 NP Veľká Fatra 16.17 LCF74
PLA Strážovská vrchy 17.06 LCF73 NP Pieniny 20.59 LCF523
PLA Štiavnické vrchy 9.28 LCF61 NP Tatra 53.55 LCF74
PLA Vihorlat 39.89 LCF71
Figure 5: Land cover flows in large protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018 (%).p

Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
83
0 30 60 90 km
Scale: 1 : 2,200,000
Content by: Michaela Žoncová
Map by: Michaela Žoncová
Source: Corine Land Cover data
© 2020, Department of Geography and Geology,
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
LCF523 – Conversions from agriculture–nature
mosaics to continuous agriculture
Dominant land cover ow
243 > 231
324 > 311 324 > 312 324 > 313
312 > 324
LCF61 – Withdrawal of farming with woodland creation
LCF71 – Conversion from transitional woodland to forest
LCF74 – Recent felling and transition
LCF73 – Forests internal conversions
311 > 313 313 > 311
231 > 311 243 > 311

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
84
can be described as alarming, as the most significant parts of Slovakia’s nature have lost a large amount
of forest areas. These areas are often affected by wind disasters, with the most considerable damage being
recorded in 2004 (Konôpka and Kunca 2016). The proportion of forests destroyed by wind calamities has
been increasing over the past 55 years (Konôpka and Konôpka 2007).
LCF61 – This sub-process involves a secondary succession sub-process and the abandonment of agri-
cultural land and its gradual transformation into transitional woodland-shrubs or forests. Two types of
changes were identified: The class land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of nat-
ural vegetation (CLC 243) was transformed into broad-leaved forest (CLC 311) in the PLA Cerová Vrchovina
and the PLA Štiavnické Vrchy and pastures were transformed into broad-leaved forests (CLC 311) in the
PLA Latorica. Abandonment of agricultural land is related to socio-economic changes in Slovakia and changes
in traditional management (Lieskovský et al. 2015; Pazúr et al. 2014). Traditional mowing or goats and sheep
grazing had prevented succession sub-processes in the past (Škodová and Gajdoš 2010). 
LCF523 – the sub-process is characterized by the conversion of predominantly agricultural structures
with natural elements into continuous agriculture. The sub-process was dominant only in NP Pieniny, where
mainly CLC 243 was converted to CLC 231.
3.3 Diversity and landscape stability of the large protected areas 
The landscape diversity in the observed years was calculated using the SDI. The variation of this index
reflects the changes in the number of landscape feature classes and their abundance. We have also deter-
mined the level of ecological stability of the landscape (Figure 6).
SDI values ranged from 0.48 in the PLA Vihorlat to 1.84 in the PLA Záhorie in 1990. The minimum
and maximum values were recorded in these areas in 2018 as well. The most significant decrease in the
–0,6 –0,4 –0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6
–40 –30 –20 –10 0 10 20 30 40
NP Tatras
NP Pieniny
NP Veľká Fatra
NP Slovenský raj
NP Slovenský kras
NP Poloniny
NP Muránska planina
NP Malá Fatra
NP Nízke Tatry
PLA Záhorie
PLA Východné Karpaty
PLA Vihorlat
PLA Štiavnické vrchy
PLA Strážovské vrchy
PLA Ponitrie
PLA Poľana
PLA Malé Karpaty
PLA Latorica
PLA Kysuce
PLA Horná Orava
PLA Dunajské Luhy
PLA Cerová vrchovina
PLA Biele Karpaty
Increase/decrease of Shannon Diversity Index
Increase/decrease of Coefficient of Ecological Stability
Figure 6: SDI and ESc change in the large protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018.

SDI value, i.e., a decrease in diversity of the landscape, occurred in the PLA Dunajské Luhy. A decline in
human activity-related land cover classes (construction and agricultural activity), was observed and reflect-
ed in SDI values. A significant decrease in SDI values also occurred in the PLA Východné Karpaty, where
the number of land cover classes did not change, but they were unequally distributed (represented) in the
landscape. On the other hand, the highest increase of SDI index occurred in the NP Nízke Tatry, the Tatra
NP , and the PLA Kysuce. The areas of coniferous forests have decreased, and the areas of transitional wood-
land-shrubs increased in the NP Nízke Tatry due to wind calamities and subsequent logging. The CLC
classes are thus represented more evenly, but in this case, the increase in SDI values suggests a higher land-
scape diversity. However, it is questionable whether this radical increase has a positive effect on the stability
of the landscape.
We have analyzed the stability of the landscape using the coefficient of ecological stability, according
to Míchal (1982). All of the protected areas in both of the monitored years reached values of the ESc index
higher than 1.0, which is a result of an almost well-balanced landscape, where the technical features are
in relative balance with the preserved natural structures. The ecological stability coefficient of less than
1.0 was recorded only in the PLA Latorica for the year 1990. This value indicates that the area was used
intensively mainly for large-scale agricultural production, while the self-regulation processes were weak-
ened, which caused lower ecological instability in these areas. However, the value of ESc had increased
above 1.0 in this area in 2018. 
Ecological stability of the landscape had decreased in four protected areas, while it increased in the
others. A small, almost negligible decline occurred in the PLA Kysuce and the NP Vysoké Tatry. However,
a significant decrease occurred in the NP Nízke Tatry and the NP Muránska Planina. Although ESc val-
ues still reached high levels in these areas (higher than in the other protected areas), these changes are alarming
as these are areas with habitats of protected species. In the NP Muránska Planina, the greatest threat is the
loss of the natural habitats of the critically endangered capercaillie (Figúr, Malina and Urban 2016). On
the contrary, the most significant increase in ESc values, i.e., a significant increase in the ecological sta-
bility of the landscape, occurred in the NP Poľana, the NP Poloniny, and the NP Veľká Fatra.
4 Discussion and conclusion
In the large-scale protected areas of Slovakia, the most substantial changes occurred between transition-
al woodland-shrubs (CLC 324) and mixed forests (CLC 313). Changes among these classes represent an
ongoing process. On the one hand, it is a process of succession, and on the other, it is a reduction of the
forest area. According to Vološčuk (2010), the assessment of the secondary succession of dendroflora in
the abandoned former pasture sites with permanent grassland is perceived rather negatively from the land-
scapes’ characteristic appearance point of view. However, this process is positive, considering the ecological
stability of a landscape, where forest ecosystems represent the most stable elements. In this sense, it is essen-
tial to perceive landscape diversity and stability as two different concepts. A decline in the stability of the
landscape despite the increase in the landscape diversity was a frequent phenomenon. Increased landscape
diversity is often a result of radical interventions in the landscape, both natural and anthropogenic. The
values of landscape-ecological indices have to be interpreted very sensitively for this reason. Although the
values of the SDI index have increased over the period studied, irreversible and degrading changes for the
landscape occurred. The share of CLC 324 (transitional woodland-shrub) increased, while the share of
CLC 312 (coniferous forests) decreased, mainly due to wind calamities and subsequent logging in the NP
Nízke Tatry. Therefore, land cover classes had a more even representation in the landscape, and the land-
scape diversity increased. Is the increase in the landscape diversity beneficial to the landscape in this way?
According to Guerra, Rosa and Pereira (2019), monitoring of land cover changes is particularly crucial in
protected areas where long-term ecosystem stability is a critical aspect of conservation. We agree with
Ružičková, Moravčíková and Lehotská (2009), who states that the resulting values of the landscape’s diver-
sity index do not describe the ecological stability and quality of the assessed area and do not take the internal
differentiation (disaggregation) of the landscape structure features into account. The penetration of den-
droflora in secondary succession into the abandoned agrarian ecosystems can cause a decrease in the value
of landscape character (patterns of elements in the landscape) and can be understood as a degradation
process. Secondary succession of dendroflora in grassland ecosystems can also be understood as ecological
Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
85

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
damage because by disrupting internal links and processes, it weakens the natural functions of permanent
grassland ecosystems (Vološčuk 2010). These conditions are suitable for the spreading of non-native and
invasive plant species and plant species in the form of scattered groups of shrubs and trees (David, Mojses
and Boltižiar 2013). According to Šebo and Kopecká (2014), small meadows in Slovakia will almost entire-
ly disappear due to the difficulty of their maintenance. This problem has been also observed throughout
other countries in Central Europe (Pruchniewicz 2017).
The second most dominant sub-process was the reduction of forest area when forest stands were
converted to transitional woodland-shrubs. This class (CLC 324) can arise through an entirely different
development and can thus take on completely different values of ecological stability or diversity. On the
one hand, it may include areas artificially mined by heavy machinery with severely anthropogenically affect-
ed and degraded landscape. However, it may also include areas affected by wind disasters left to develop
spontaneously and thus with slower but spontaneous forest regeneration. The issue of landscape management
after wind disasters is still very up-to-date, and there is a constant debate about whether it is necessary to
remove or leave calamity wood in the landscape. According to Urbanovičová, Miklisová and Kováč (2014),
it is much more appropriate to leave the fallen wood after a wind calamity in the landscape to enable the
survival of specific forest species and to preserve the diversity of forests. The wind is becoming one of the
most important abiotic factors, which causes various disturbances in the landscape of Slovakia (Konôpka,
Zach and Kulfan 2016). The importance of protected areas in Slovakia is also confirmed by the fact that
deforestation is visible on a much smaller scale in the protected areas than in the surrounding unprotected
areas (Butsic et al. 2017). For example, the difference can also be seen between the Polish and Slovak sides
of the Tatra National Park, with radical differences in the opinions on logging in the national parks, on
bark beetles, and large predators hunting (Janiga et al. 2012). A new law entered into force in Slovakia on
1 January 2020, strengthening the competence of the State Nature Conservancy of Slovak Republic. Logging
will not be possible in the protected areas with the third and higher degree of protection without its con-
sent, while so far, they have had such powers only in areas with the fifth degree of protection.
Based on the results obtained, we can conclude that the CLC database is a suitable data source to ana-
lyze main land cover changes in Slovakia in larger areas, but some classes may also include diametrically
different types of landscapes (e.g., CLC 324) that perform different functions. However, the CLC database
also has its negatives (Jovanović, Milanovic and Zorn 2018) and is not suitable for monitoring current changes
(5–10 years) and for monitoring changes in small areas, as the Minimum Mapping Unit (MMU) is 25 ha.
Also, the values of landscape ecological metrics should be sensitively interpreted because it does not take
the internal differentiation of land cover classes into account. In the future, it is necessary to focus on the
proper management of the landscape after wind calamities, as these are the primary triggers of the sig-
nificant landscape changes in protected areas of Slovakia. Although the process associated with new
construction activity did not predominate in any of the protected areas, purposeful innovations in line with
the principles of sustainable development are still necessary for the development of these areas (Lencsésová,
Gajdošík and Gúčik 2015).
Therefore, we agree with Paunović and Jovanović (2019), that it is necessary to put a special empha-
sis on exchange of best practices and improvement of the quality of all sustainable tourism elements from
other countries. 
ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under
Contract no. APVV-18-0185 Land-use changes of Slovak cultural landscape and prediction of its further
development.
5 References
Boltižiar, M. 2010: Analysis of the development of heterogeneity and chosen qualities of the spots of the
structure of alpine land (on the example of chosen model land of High Tatra). Folia geographica 51-16.
Butsic, V ., Munteanu, C., Griffiths, P ., Knorn, J., Radeloff, V . C., Lieskovský, J., Mueller, D., Kuemmerle,
T. 2017: The effect of protected areas on forest disturbance in the Carpathian Mountains 1985–2010.
Conservation Biology 31-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12835
86

David, S., Mojses, M., Boltižiar, M. 2013: How and why is Changing the Landscape of Dry Polder Beša?
Životné prostredie 47-3.
DeFries, R., Hansen, A., Turner, B., Reid, R., Liu, J. 2007: Land Use Change Around Protected Areas:
Management to Balance Human Needs and Ecological Function. Ecological applications 17-4. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1890/05-1111
Deriaz, J., Ciglič, R., Ferk, M., Loczy, D. 2019: The Influence of Different Levels of Data Detail on Land use
Change Analyses: A Case Study of Franciscan Cadastre for a Part of the Pannonian Hills, Slovenia.
European Countryside 11-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2019-0019
Feranec, J., Jaffrain, G., Soukup, J., Hazeu, G. W . 2010: Determining changes and flows in European land-
scapes 1990–2000 using CORINE Land Cover data. Applied Geography 30-1. DOI: https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apgeog.2009.07.003
Feranec, J., Šúri, M., Cebecauer, T., Oťahel, J. 2002: Methodological aspects of landscape changes detec-
tion and analysis in Slovakia applying the CORINE Land Cover databases. Geografický časopis 53-3. 
Feranec, K., Oťahel, J. 2001: Krajinná pokrývka Slovenska. Bratislava. 
Figúr, J., Malina, R., Urban, P . 2016: Hlucháň hôrny (T etrao Urogallus) v chránenom vtáčom území Muránska
planina – Stolica. Ochrana prírody 27.
Gabrovec, M., Ortar, J., Pavšek, M., Zorn, M., Triglav Čekada, M. 2013: The Triglav Glacier between the
years 1999 and 2012. Acta geographica Slovenica 53-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS53202
Gajdoš, A., Klaučo, M., Škodová, M. 2012: Ecological significance of the forest ecotone vegetation in the
Starohorské Hills. Geographical journal 64.
Geldmann, J., Joppa, L. N., Burgess, N. D. 2014: Mapping change in human pressure globally on land and
within protected areas. Conservation Biology 28-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12332
Guerra, C. A., Rosa, I. M. D., Pereira, H. M. 2019: Change versus stability: are protected areas particularly
pressured by global land cover change? Landscape Ecology 34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-
019-00918-4
Haines-Y oung, R., Weber, J. L. 2006: Land Account for Europe 1990-2000. Towards integrated land and
ecosystem accounting. EEA Report No 11/2006. Internet: http:/ /www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_
report_2006_11 (14. 11. 2019).
Hamad, R., Kolo, K., Balzter, H. 2018: Land cover changes induced by demining operations in Halgurd-
Sakran national park in the Kurdistan region of Iraq. Sustainability 10-7. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.3390/
su10072422
Janiga, M., Markuljaková, K., Mahút, O., Pogányová, P ., Kohútová, Z., Šulavík, J., Boháčová, A., Herian,
N., Ivaničová, Z., Veselská, M., Štefancová, D., Ištoňa, M., Tichý, P ., Kvanda, J., Mikoláš, P ., Griga, F.,
Chovancová, S., Adamová, M., Lištiaková, E., Gašperanová, J., Kozárik, V ., Hruška, D., Podracká, M.,
Masaryk, M., Novisedláková, M., Thomková, J., Kmecík, J., Karkoszková, V ., Bugáň, P ., Šudila, M.,
Richtárech, P . 2012: Revenues of stakeholders in the national parks and landscape protection areas of
the Slovak Republic. Oecologia Montana 21-1.
Izakovičová, Z. 2012: Environmental Quality of the Slovak Rural Settlements. Životné prostredie 46- 4.
Janík, T., Romportl, D. 2018: Recent land cover change after the Kyrill windstorm in the Šumava NP . Applied
Geography 97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.06.006
Jansen, L. J. M. 2006: Harmonization of land use class sets to facilitate compatibility and comparability of data
across space and time. Journal of Land Use Science 1, 2-4. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.1080/17474230601079241
Jovanović, M. M., Milanović, M. M., Zorn, M. 2018: The use of NDVI and CORINE Land Cover databas-
es for forest management in Serbia. Acta geographica Slovenica 58-1. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.3986/AGS.818
Klaučo, M., Weis, K., Gregorová, B., Anstead, L. 2014: Geografické informačné systémy 3. Banská Bystrica.
Klaučo, M., Weis, K., Stankov, U., Arsenovic, D., Marković, V . 2012: Ecological significance of land-cover
based on interpretation of human-tourism impact. A case from two different protected areas (Slovakia
and Serbia). Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 7-3. 
Kňazovičová, L., Chasníková, S., Novák, J., Barančok, P . 2018: Impacts of ski pistes preparation and ski
tourism on vegetation. Ekológia 37-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eko-2018-0014
Köhler, R., Olschofsky, K., Gerard, F . 2006: Land cover change in Europe from the 1950’ies to 2000. Hamburg.
Konôpka, B., Zach, P ., Kulfan, J. 2016: Wind – an important ecological factor and destructive agent in forests.
Lesnícky časopis – Forestry Journal 62-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/forj-2016-0013 
Konôpka, J., Konôpka, B. 2007: Vývoj náhodnej ťažby dreva na Slovensku a jej prognóza pre vietor, sneh
a námrazu do roku 2025. Lesnícky časopis – Forestry Journal 53-4. 
Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
87

Michaela Žoncová, Land cover changes in protected areas of Slovakia between 1990 and 2018
Konôpka, J., Kunca, A. 2016: Náhodná ťažba v rokoch 1960 – 2014. Výskyt škodlivých činiteľov v lesoch
Slovenska v rokoch 1960 – 2014, v roku 2015 a prognóza ich vývoja. Zvolen.
Krajewski, P . 2019: Monitoring of Landscape Transformations within Landscape Parks in Poland in the
21st Century. Sustainability 11-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082410
Kumar, M., Denis, D. M., Singh S. K., Szabó, S., Suryavanshi, S. 2018: Landscape metrics for assessment
of land cover change and fragmentation of a heterogeneous watershed. Remote Sens Applications: Society
and Environment 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2018.04.002 
Lambin, E.F ., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Geist, H.J. 2000: Are agricultural land-use models able to predict changes
in land-use intensity? Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 82-1.
Lencsésová, Z., Gajdošík, T., Gúčik, M. 2015: Ensuring the sustainable development in protected areas in
Slovakia. Ekonomia I Srodowisko 55-4.
Li, Z., Li, X., Ma, W . Y . A., Wang, J. 2004: Land-use change analysis in Yulin prefecture, northwestern China
using remote sensing and GIS. International Journal of Remote Sensing 25-24. DOI: https://doi.org/
10.1080/01431160412331291206
Lieskovský, J., Bezák, P ., Špulerová, J., Lieskovský, T ., Koleda, P ., Dobrovodská, M., Bürgi, M., Gimmi, U. 2015:
The abandonment of traditional agricultural landscape in Slovakia – Analysis of extent and driving forces.
Journal of Rural Studies 37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.12.007
Margules, C. R., Pressey, R. L., Williams, P . H. 2002: Representing biodiversity: Data and procedures for
identifying priority areas for conservation. Journal of Biosciences 27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02704962
Martin, E. H., Jensen, R. R., Hardin, P . J., Kisingo, A. W ., Shoo, R. A., Eustace, A. 2019: Assessing changes
in Tanzania’s Kwakuchinja Wildlife Corridor using multitemporal satellite imagery and open source
tools. Applied Geography 110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2019.102051 
Martinez del Castillo, E., García-Martin, A., Longares Aladrén, L. A., de Luis, M. 2015: Evaluation of for-
est cover change using remote sensing techniques and landscape metrics in Moncayo Natural Park (Spain).
Applied Geography 62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.05.002
Míchal, I. 1982: Principy krajinářského hodnocení území. Architektúra a urbanizmus XVI/Z. Bratislava.
Olahová, J., Vojtek, M., Boltižiar, M. 2013: Application of geoinaromation technologies for the assesment
of landscape structure using landscape-ecological indexes (case study of the Handlová landslide).
Tájökológiai Lapok 11-2.
Paunović, I., Jovanović, V . 2019: Sustainable mountain tourism in word and deed: A comparative analysis
in the macro regions of the Alps and the Dinarides. Acta geographica Slovenica 59-2. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/
10.3986/AGS.4630
Pazúr, R., Bolliger, J. 2017: Land changes in Slovakia: Past processes and future directions. Applied Geography
85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.05.009
Pazúr, R., Lieskovský, J., Feranec, J., Oťahel, J. 2014: Spatial determinants of abandonment of large-scale
arable lands and managed grasslands in Slovakia during the periods of post-socialist transition and
European Union accession. Applied Geography 54. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.07.014 
Perdigao, V ., Christensen, S. 2000: The LACOAST atlas: Land cover changes in European coastal zones.
Milan.
Pruchniewicz, D. 2017: Abandonment of traditionally managed mesic mountain meadows affects plant
species composition and diversity. Basic and Applied Ecology 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.baae.2017.01.006
Radeloff, V . C., Gutman, G. 2017: Land-Cover and Land-Use Changes in Eastern Europe after the Collapse
of the Soviet Union in 1991. Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42638-9
Ribeiro, D., Šmid Hribar, M. 2019: Assessment of land-use changes and their impacts on ecosystem ser-
vices in two Slovenian rural landscapes. Acta Geographica Slovenica 59-2. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.3986/
AGS.6636
Rodríguez-Rodríguez, D., Martínez-Vega, J., Echavarría, P . 2019: A twenty year GIS-based assessment of
environmental sustainability of land use changes in and around protected areas of a fast developing
country: Spain. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 74. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2018.08.006
88

Rušnák, T., Izsóff, M., Lieskovský, J. 2017: Exploitation of geotagged photos as an indicator of visit rate
and visual attractiveness of tourism objects. Topical issues of tourism, Conference Proceedings of the
International Conference, Jihlava.
Ružičková, J., Moravčíková, Z., Lehotská, B. 2009: Ochrana a využívanie krajiny. Bratislava.
Sláviková, D., Slávik, D. 2006: Is it Possible to Work Calamity in a Protected Area by Consensus? Životné
Prostredie 40.
Stott, A., Haines-Y oung, E. 1998: Linking land cover, intensity of use and botanical diversity in an account-
ing framework in the UK. Environmental accounting in theory and practice. Dordrecht.
Šebo, D., Kopecká, M. 2014: Abandonment of agricultural landscape after 1989: A case study from the Považie
Region, Slovakia. Geografický časopis 66-4. 
Škodová, M., Gajdoš, A. 2010: Dynamics of changes in the structure of the forest edge in Slovakia. Studia
Geographica I. Annales Uniwersitet Paedagogicae Cracoviensis 93-1.
Štátny zoznam osobitne chránených častí prírody SR, 2020. Internet: http://uzemia.enviroportal.sk/about
(4. 6. 2020).
Urbanc, M., Printsmann, A., Palang, H., Skowronek, E., W oloszyn, W ., Konkoly Gyuró, É. 2004: Comprehension
of rapidly transforming landscapes of Central and Eastern Europe in the 20th century. Acta geographica
Slovenica 44-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS44204
Urbanovičová, V ., Miklisová, D., Kováč, Ľ. 2014: Forest disturbance enhanced the activity of epedaphic
collembola in windthrown stands of the High Tatra mountains Journal of Mountain Science 11. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-013-2736-z
Vološčuk, I. 2010: Vplyv sukcesie rastlinstva na charakteristický vzhľad krajiny. Enviroportál 28-6.
Zafar, S. M. 2014: Spatio-temporal analysis of land cover/land use changes using geoinformatics (A case
study of Margallah Hills National Park). Indian Journal of Science and Technology 7.
Zákon o lesoch. Zákon Slovenskej republiky 326/2005. Bratislava.
Zákon o ochrane prírody a krajiny. Zákon Slovenskej republiky 543/2002. Bratislava.
Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-2, 2020
89