Abstract
It remains difficult to compare the state of conservation of forests of different nations. Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) are a set of variables designed as a framework for harmonizing biodiversity monitoring. Methods to monitor forest biodiversity are traditional monitoring (according to conservation policy requirements), remote sensing, environmental DNA, and the information products that are derived from them (RS/eDNA biodiversity products). However, it is not clear to what extent indicators from conservation policies align with EBVs and RS/eDNA biodiversity products. This research evaluated current gaps in harmonization between EBVs, RS/eDNA biodiversity products and forest conservation indicators. We compared two sets of biodiversity variables: (1) forest conservation indicators and (2) RS/eDNA biodiversity products, within the context of the Essential Biodiversity Variables framework. Indicators derived from policy documents can mostly be categorized within the EBV ‘ecosystem vertical profile’, while ‘ecosystem function’ remains underrepresented. RS/eDNA biodiversity products, however, can provide information about ‘ecosystem function’. Integrating RS/eDNA biodiversity products that monitor ecosystem functioning into monitoring programs will lead to a more comprehensive and balanced reporting on forest biodiversity. In addition, using the same variables and similar RS/eDNA products for forest biodiversity and conservation policies is a requirement for harmonization and international policy reporting.
Highlights
Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) are a set of variables designed as a framework for harmonizing biodiversity monitoring
There is a poor alignment between the information that is delivered by RS/eDNA biodiversity products and the information required for forest conservation policies
Our results show that RS/eDNA biodiversity products provide much information about ecosystem functioning, whereas currently formulated forest conservation policies call for information about community composition and ecosystem structure
Summary
Monitoring forest biodiversity is an important part of many local, regional, and global nature conservation policies [2–4]. Some policies are aimed at harmonization between different regions and nations, such as the European Habitats Directive [3], it remains very difficult to compare the state of conservation of forests [5]. This hampers the monitoring of trends across regions. Differences in naturalness arise, amongst others, from the logging history of forests (see Supplementary B List S1 on Forestry Backgrounds), reforestation and management. In Europe, forested areas that are protected natural reserves were mostly planted, and rarely meet the conditions of naturalness [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
