Improving biodiversity monitoring in Europe is not only a question of collecting more data. It also depends on how existing monitoring efforts are organised so that data can be compared, combined and used beyond their original context.
A fragmented landscape
Across Europe, national programmes, research initiatives and thematic networks generate large amounts of information on species, habitats and ecosystem change. But these efforts have largely developed in parallel, shaped by different mandates, methods and reporting needs. Uneven coverage, limited interoperability and differences in monitoring design make it difficult to use data consistently at European scale.
This points to a broader challenge that is becoming increasingly visible across European initiatives, from research projects testing new methods to community-building efforts such as BioMonWeek: how to move from a patchwork of monitoring systems towards a more coordinated approach.
A more coherent system would improve the usability of biodiversity data across Europe. Aligning data collection with policy, research and management needs, it would support more consistent reporting, reduce duplication of effort and strengthen the evidence base for decision-making.
From fragmentation to coordination
Taking stock of Biodiversa+’s work on biodiversity monitoring, a new report outlines a multi-level approach to strengthen coordination across scales. It is based on:
- a European coordination function to support alignment and data integration,
- national coordination mechanisms to organise and connect monitoring activities,
- thematic networks that provide expertise and support harmonised approaches.
The aim is not to create entirely new systems, but to improve how existing ones work together and contribute to shared objectives.
Establishing a shared baseline and ensuring continuity
Coordination alone is not enough if monitoring systems remain too different to be combined. Variations in objectives, variables and sampling approaches continue to limit the integration and interpretation of data. The report therefore recommends defining common minimum requirements to establish a shared baseline. This would make data integration easier while preserving flexibility in implementation.
The report underlines that continuity is just as important. Monitoring must be maintained over time if it is to detect change, support evaluation and remain relevant to long-term policy needs. That requires stable governance structures, sustained funding for core monitoring functions and sufficient capacity to manage and use data effectively.
Among other recommnedations, the report also highlights the role of emerging technologies, such as eDNA and remote sensing. These approaches can improve coverage and efficiency, but only if they are supported by appropriate standards, infrastructure and training.
Taken together, these elements point towards a shift from a collection of largely independent monitoring efforts to a more coordinated approach, better able to support decision-making. The report outlines how this transition can be built on existing systems, by improving how they connect and operate across scales.
