When good forests look bad: Methodological biases in EU conservation status reporting

Harald Mauser

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111610

When good forests look bad: Methodological biases in EU conservation status reporting

2025-11-15

0

PRE

AI

H

Harald Mauser *

M

Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat

B

Bart Muys

DOI：10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111610

Original

Original request for help

Save

Abstract

En 中文

• Assessment rules and thresholds distort reporting outcomes, limiting its sensitivity to positive or negative change. • 50% of the forest area may be in good condition, but only 14% is recognized as good state of conservation. • Uniform scoring methods overlook different contexts between countries hindering restoration planning. • Findings call for revised methods and clearer communication aligned with the EU Restoration Law. • This analysis emphasizes the need for a more proportionate approach that incorporates also area-based results.

Keywords:

Biodiversity conservation

EU Habitats Directive

Assessment methodology

Monitoring framework

EU Nature Restoration Law

Forest habitats

Forest restoration

Ecological indicator

When good forests look bad: Methodological biases in EU conservation status reporting

Abstract

Journal

Organization