We present the official land uplift model NKG2016LU of the Nordic Commission of Geodesy (NKG) for northern Europe. The model was released in 2016 and covers an area from 49° to 75° latitude and 0° to 50° longitude. It shows a maximum absolute uplift of 10.3 mm/a near the city of Umeå in northern Sweden and a zero-line that follows the shores of Germany and Poland. The model replaces the NKG2005LU model from 2005. Since then, we have collected more data in the core areas of NKG2005LU, specifically in Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland, and included observations from the Baltic countries as well. Additionally, we have derived an underlying geophysical glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) model within NKG as an integrated part of the NKG2016LU project. A major challenge is to estimate a realistic uncertainty grid for the model. We show how the errors in the observations and the underlying GIA model propagate through the calculations to the final uplift model. We find a standard error better than 0.25 mm/a for most of the area covered by precise levelling or uplift rates from Continuously Operating Reference Stations and up to 0.7 mm/a outside this area. As a check, we show that two different methods give approximately the same uncertainty estimates. We also estimate changes in the geoid and derive an alternative uplift model referring to this rising geoid. Using this latter model, the maximum uplift in Umeå reduces from 10.3 to 9.6 mm/a and with a similar reduction ratio elsewhere. When we compare this new NKG2016LU with the former NKG2005LU, we find the largest differences where the GIA model has the strongest influence, i.e. outside the area of geodetic observation. Here, the new model gives from − 3 to 4 mm/a larger values. Within the observation area, similar differences reach − 1.5 mm/a at the northernmost part of Norway and − 1.0 mm/a at the north-western coast of Denmark, but generally within the range of − 0.5 to 0.5 mm/a.

Changes to mean sea level and/or sea level extremes (e.g., storm surges) will lead to changes in coastal impacts. These changes represent a changing exposure or risk to our society. Here, we present 21st century sea-level projections for Norway largely based on the Fifth Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC AR5). An important component of past and present sea-level change in Norway is glacial isostatic adjustment. We therefore pay special attention to vertical land motion, which is constrained using new geodetic observations with improved spatial coverage and accuracies, and modelling work. Projected ensemble mean 21st century relative sea-level changes for Norway are, depending on location, from −0.10 to 0.30 m for emission scenario RCP2.6; 0.00 to 0.35 m for RCP 4.5; and 0.15 to 0.55 m for RCP8.5. For all RCPs, the projected ensemble mean indicates that the vast majority of the Norwegian coast will experience a rise in sea level. Norway’s official return heights for extreme sea levels are estimated using the average conditional exceedance rate (ACER) method. We adapt an approach for calculating sea level allowances for use with the ACER method. All the allowances calculated give values above the projected ensemble mean Relative Sea Level (RSL) rise, i.e., to preserve the likelihood of flooding from extreme sea levels, a height increase above the most likely RSL rise should be used in planning. We also show that the likelihood of exceeding present-day return heights will dramatically increase with sea-level rise.

Various vertical reference levels are used in the coastal zone, for various purposes. Being able to transform accurately and efficiently between them is of increasing interest since the need for seamless data over sea and land is growing due to sea-level rise, coastal engineering, and more frequent storm surges. We present a method for simultaneous calculation of models linking the ellipsoid, the geoid, and mean sea level using least-squares collocation. The method includes calculations of interpolated model surfaces together with associated standard error surfaces that provide estimates of the models’ uncertainty. We have applied the method on data from Norway, including sea level data and GNSS/levelling points, and calculated a mean sea surface and a dynamic ocean topography model. The estimated formal errors of the models range 0.4–1.8 cm and 0.5–3.5 cm, respectively. To assess the dynamic ocean topography model, we compared it with satellite altimetry-based datasets. Depending on which dataset used for comparison, we obtained mean differences between −3.2 and $$1.2~\textrm{cm}$$ 1.2 cm and standard deviations between 4.2 and 5.0 cm at the outer limit of the domain of the estimated models where the distances to the observations are at their longest.

The shallow Baltic Sea is a vital waterway with dense shipping traffic, requiring accurate and reliable nautical charts for safe navigation. Until recently, different realisations of the mean sea level were used in the paper charts of each country, sometimes even between harbours. This created obstacles for the digitalisation of ship navigation, including electronic nautical charts combined with satellite-based positioning. To resolve this, the Baltic Sea Hydrographic Commission decided in 2013 to introduce the Baltic Sea Chart Datum 2000 (BSCD2000) as a common height/depth reference system for the maritime sector in the Baltic Sea. The new reference level for all depth and water level information is strictly the quasigeoid, which is practically identical to the geoid at sea. The BSCD2000 is defined in accordance with the European reference systems: the European Terrestrial Reference System 1989 (ETRS89) for ellipsoidal coordinates and the European Vertical Reference System (EVRS) for physical heights. This enables the practical implementation of the zero level through a seamless height transformation grid with standard uncertainties of approximately 1–2 cm, which is harmonised with national coordinates, heights, and height reference surfaces. To the authors’ knowledge, this level of harmonisation is unprecedented in the maritime sector and exemplifies the value of the unification of height systems in geodesy. The paper outlines the foundations of the BSCD2000 and the approach to construct the BSCD2000 height transformation grid. While the computation of the gravimetric marine quasigeoid model is based on well-established methods, special focus is placed on practical harmonisation across national borders and along the coastline. To this end, a novel fitting and blending scheme based on distance maps was developed. Finally, comparison of the new gravimetric marine quasigeoid solution with a preliminary geometric marine geoid model based on SWOT altimetry data and hydrodynamic modelling confirmed good agreement within a few centimetres in most areas of the Baltic Sea.