
Abstract To achieve the goals of the 2030 Global Biodiversity Framework, the European Biodiversity Strategy, and the EU Green Deal, biodiversity monitoring is critical. Monitoring efforts in Europe, however, suffer from gaps and biases in taxonomy, spatial coverage, and temporal resolution, resulting in fragmented and disconnected data. To assess user and policy needs in biodiversity monitoring, we employed a four‐step user‐centered stakeholder engagement process with over 300 stakeholders including a public stakeholder workshop, online survey, interviews, and a meeting with experts from 18 EU member states, the European Commission, and the European Environment Agency. The stakeholders identified policy needs, current challenges, and potential solutions. Based on the policy and stakeholder assessment, we recommend establishing a European Biodiversity Observation Coordinating Centre to optimize existing observation efforts, harmonize data, and enhance our ability to predict and respond to key challenges related to biodiversity loss in Europe.
570, data collection, Monitoring, challenges, Conservation, Implementation,monitoring, QH1-199.5, 630, Stakeholder engagement, Challenges, implementation, solutions, biodiversity, European biodiversity, stakeholder engagement, conservation, General. Including nature conservation, geographical distribution, Biodiversity, Solutions, monitoring, Policy, Implementation, Data collection, policy
570, data collection, Monitoring, challenges, Conservation, Implementation,monitoring, QH1-199.5, 630, Stakeholder engagement, Challenges, implementation, solutions, biodiversity, European biodiversity, stakeholder engagement, conservation, General. Including nature conservation, geographical distribution, Biodiversity, Solutions, monitoring, Policy, Implementation, Data collection, policy
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 40 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
